Luzifer

Ich habe dabei auch Server-Plugins im Verdacht, die Pings von Spielern überwachen und die Spieler ab einer gesetzten Grenze rausschmeissen. Wenn der Ping schon grenzwertig ist, kann er sich auch kurzzeitig über die Grenze bewegen. Ich habe auch schon mal die Verbindung verloren, als ich vom Desktop zurück zu DCS gewechselt bin. Wohl weil DCS beim Reinitialisieren der Grafik bei der Serververbindung etwas nachlässt und dann über die Ping-Grenze rutscht.

Hehe, perfect expression. "Let us never speak of this again."

To further complement that, using the ailerons to bank creates an even stronger adverse yaw. Say you're banking left, this means you use the ailerons to generate increased lift on the right and reduced lift on the left. As more lift means more drag, the aircraft will yaw to the right if you don't use rudders to counter the force. Both effects are less pronounced on aircraft with low aspect ratio wings such as fighters and more on the A-10 (and most on gliders).

As the manual says, gravity/suction feed is enough to keep the engines running (off the internal tanks at least, don't know about external) below 10000 ft.

They closed the studio responsible for developing and maintaining MS Flight Simulator in January 2009. Microsoft Flight was the short lived successor.

That said, EAC activation is somewhat dodgy in my experience. Often after starting everything up everything else and switching on EAC as the last action before taxiing, the EAC warning light stays on. I double and triple check that everything required is activated and can find no reason it shouldn't just work. Sometimes I say "whatever", leave the EAC switch in the on position and taxi to the runway and during takeoff prechecks I see the EAC light is off. Other times it just turns off during the time I look around searching for things I might have forgot (just looking, not actually touching anything). INS is aligned and in NAV mode of course.

You need to enable the nose wheel steering system, otherwise it doesn't do anything in response to rudder.

There are exceptions for educating citizens, defending against anti-constitutional efforts, art or science, research or teaching, reporting about current affairs or history, and similar purposes. §86(3) StGB, for those who are curious. You forgot the Bachem Ba 349, but yeah. Also there's a Ju-52 which I think would have had swastikas on it while it was operational. And I don't think the V1 and V2 were even marked while they were operated. Given the exceptions, it would be likely legal for them to have historically accurate markings on their exhibits. But a) visitors would invariably be offended and there would be lots of swastikas just in that one hall and b) it's a museum of science and technology, the paint job isn't all that relevant, so why plaster an exhibition hall with swastikas?

Multiplayer servers can disable data export to prevent cheating. That's where you get 1k log files with no usable content.

When the engine and rotor have zero RPM, RPM is definitely low. What else should it display? You can disable the warning tone with a switch just below the warning lights panel.

There's a separate setting for cockpit shadows, if I remember right. Make sure that is on.

Für die Originaltreue brauchst du am Stick nichts belegen. Zumindest bei mir wurde der Warthog Stick automatisch richtig belegt. Basteln muss man nur für zusätzliche Funktionen. Die einzigen Funktionen die ich dazu noch belegt habe sind der Starterknopf (auf L/G Warn Silence am Throttle gelegt) und Throttle auf/zu auf den Luftbremsenschalter. Hatte ich ursprünglich auf einem der Schubhebel und den anderen für Collective, aber da man den Throttle im Normalfall nach dem Startup nicht mehr bewegt, habe ich lieber beide Hebel zusammen für Collective, liegt besser in der Hand. Sonstige Funktionen habe ich nicht belegt, allerdings habe ich auch noch nicht viel mit Waffen gemacht, dagegen mehr reines Fliegen.

I have reduced curves a lot (10 at most) for the cyclic and even less for the pedals. Curvature makes control around trim more precise but that much worse far away from trim. And in transitions of flight regimes, until you have the time to trim, you need the control authority as well as precision far off trim. Once you have figured how to prevent pendulum oscillations in hover (fixating a distant ground feature is a good practice) then hovering in ground effect is actually relatively easy. Ground effect becomes stronger closer to the ground, so hover altitude is stable with a given collective setting. Taxiing around the whole airfield is a breeze then without even touching the collective. So I got that down within a few hours of practice. Take-Off with transition to forward flight at speed is okay. Landing at the spot I'm aiming at with transition to hover? Oh, I definitely have to still work at that. Half the time I end up somewhere way off. The other half I driver the Huey into the ground. Ahem. So yeah, just practice is all you need, and not a tamed flight model.

Should it be working for carriers, too? Two days ago there were lots of Hueys on the Virtual Aerobatics server going for a picnic on the American carrier and it felt like there was no ground effect. Hilarity ensued. :D It is really hard to hover on the deck and you need to pitch up more to hold position or slow down, and many tail strikes were had. Are these things indicative of missing ground effect?

Do you have weapons active and targeted? That reconfigures the HUD, if you want to go back to navigation mode you have to cancel targetting, there's a button / command for that.

I can't hear the instructor narrating in the training missions. I do hear the radio call "kchk" sound at the start of each narration but then only silence. The text boxes are there, just not the sound.

Basically you have a set of default profiles for every weapon you have in your loadout. Those profiles are loaded from the data cartridge during your startup preparations (as part of the "Load All"). I guess in real life the pilots would set up the profiles and save them to the cartridge during mission planning, we in the sim only get defaults and have to change them ourselves. The "normal" way to attack is to set the HUD as SOI and select the desired profile with the DMS short left/right. That way you can have multiple profiles for the same weapons with different settings set up in advance and only have to choose from them to get all the settings. Creating a manual profile by selecting weapon stations on the DSMS is really just for those situations where you don't have the profile you require and need to set it up quickly. Well, that, and for creating new profiles from scratch without editing or copying existing profiles. The name field is on the left on the first page you see when you view a profile and it's initially empty. One more thing, when you go into an existing profile, set the name field and save you rename the profile. When you change the settings and set no name, you edit the profile. When you both set the name and change the settings then you get a copy with the new settings under the given name.

You are working with temporary (manual) profiles when you select stations directly. There are several possibilities to make those changes permanent: 1. Don't select stations, view the list of profiles and edit the existing profile for the weapons you want to change. 2. Same as 1., but you copy the existing profile to still have the original. Same editing, but also set the name field before saving. 3. Save the manual profile by setting the name field before saving.

That is generally true, but the AMD64 architecture is something of a special case. They didn't just expand the address space, they also added a lot of general purpose registers to the notoriously register starved x86 architecture. Technically these are unrelated improvements that could have been added separately, but since they came together making use of the extra registers boils down to "compiling for 64 bit". To benefit from those the software has to be recompiled for 64 bit, of course. Merely running the 32 bit executable under a 64 bit OS wouldn't help.

I'd add that Außenlasten is specifically external payloads, but that was probably obvious. The best translation for Stirnfläche I could find is "projected frontal area", i.e. the area of the shadow you get when shining wide parallel light onto the object straight from the front. Cross section wouldn't be entirely accurate because that would be a slice out of the object and e.g. for a cross section of a bomb taken from the middle wouldn't include the fins buuuut all of that was, again, likely obvious and I'm just being nitpicky here. :)

I do think that comment by Wags was slightly… naive. When Nevada is released eventually it will be the first map using EDGE and likely the only one for quite a while. So I think players and mission builders alike will descend on it like a pack of hungry wolves and not be held back by such minor trifles like plausibility.:D

Probably the reason the word popped into your head is that "cheat sheet" is a commonly used term for such collections of commonly needed and important functions. There's certainly a lot of cheat sheets for things such as text editors out there, so it's a pretty accurate term.:thumbup:

I'm not sure where I read it, but the new Nevada map is supposed to be much bigger. Also, the "practice mission" comment was with respect to there being no believable scenario for war in Nevada, not because the map is small.

Gar nicht. Entweder du verwendest Ruderpedale oder du musst das über die Tastatur steuern.

That is a good example of something that can't be parallelized. Here a depends on the result of b, c depends on the result of a, d depends on the result of c. So even if you distribute it to more threads, it will end up being done in sequence and nothing is gained but performance is lost. Parallelizing only makes sense when you have multiple computation cores actually running in parallel. Actually gaining something from such a setup requires that the problem can be split in multiple independent parts that only occasionally need synchronization across threads. Lots of problems simply can't be processed in parallel. For those where it is possible, it's hard to do when the code isn't designed to do so from the ground up. Converting an existing code base to parallel execution thus needs a lot of work and introduces a lot of potential bugs in the required synchronization. And you better hope that in the end you gain more by parallel execution than you lose by the synchronization and communication you have to introduce.