Vivoune

I'm confused, I just acquired FC3 only a few days ago. As far as I can see, without touching any curves or .lua, my Throttle (Trustmaster Warthog) works as I imagine it would: Afterburner start to kick in when I get past the AB physical mark on the throttle unit and I can control its power in a range of about 10% rpm. Basically full throttle I'm at 90%, past that AB kicks in from 90 to 100-101. I only tested it in the Su-27 and F-15C. Am I missing something and can it go faster? gauge goes as high as 110% is it reachable?

Personally I welcome frequent patches, it's easier to download a few hundred Mb every now and then than a few Gb at a time every few weeks. Stuff get fixed and bug squashed fairly rapidly and I find it always very reassuring in term of general 'health' as It keeps DCS constantly alive and moving from where I stand. The tinier and more frequent the patch, the easier it is for dev and community to assess if the addressed fix is working as intended or not and correct it accordingly with another quick patch.

Well then do! ^^ Let people not being too happy about it voice their concerns and keep on communicating your optimism. No need to complain about people complaining or try and change people's mind. I backed that project even if I kinda agree it's not the best module to come to DCS considering how little intel is available to properly simulate it, there's pros and cons, don't just go tagging everywhere hater, naysayer and whiner when someone expose some concerns. :)

Tiger or Apache? Hind or Havoc? Hmm. Yes please.

Weird indeed. Probably a small omission.

Big yes here. I'd still favor military aircraft I think, but in terms of integration into DCS I think some civil (or unarmed/logistic) aircraft could be a lot of fun and provide a wide variety of missions and scenarios in both sp and mp that could benefit one another rather easily. -Player Air Transport (Civil) most likely needs an escort of a few fighters (Military) while it's a nice target for the other team. -Player air refueling -Ejected pilot recovery etc Still I don't see it as something that is really needed considering there are other things that needs work/updating before throwing in the DCS world that much more content, as awesome as it would be. IMO.

Afaik Kickstarter only uses Credit Cards, through Amazon. Oh and backed! gl (Reach goals is weird, Stretch goal is sexy)

Well, it kinda states in big yellow letters on top of that button that it "GOES LIVE ON KICKSTARTER - 6/28/2013" ^^

Nice shots Beaupower32, angry but a happy family from what I see!

Definitely the best thing to do yea, enjoy!

win7/64

Indeed I agree it would be nice, having just acquired FC3 myself and coming from regular DCS modules it is quite frustrating having to rely on hotkeys alone, but I just honestly think in order to achieve what you describe would ask of ED to dedicate an amount of resources that would just sort of defeats the purpose of FC3 which is to offer a fair amount of planes in a less invasive (more casual) manner that allows for a reasonably low selling price. Don't get me wrong if they'd add it now I'd welcome it with joy but I still think that if ED is to work on cockpit systems & clickable buttons it should be on high fidelity DCS modules that can be sold at a higher price to make up for the dev costs and not on 'casual' modules owned by Ubisoft. Although like you said if such work could then somehow be used to vastly shorten the development of their high fidelity counter-part then it's another story! IMHO.

Don't mistake criticism or skepticism for hate though ;) Looking forward to friday!

Clickable cockpit wouln't make sense for FC3 planes. It means all their system would be simulated and then they'd just be DCS quality modules, FC3 is also/mostly appreciated for its casual approach. Besides I think ED wants to be done with Flaming Cliff which is an UBI license and focus on proper ED owned DCS modules AFAIK. Tbh, despite being anything but a graphic whore, rather than new modules/new module features my hopes are for the new IG all together. DCS is ageing fast and with the new gen graphics coming it's gonna get worse in a matter of months. I'd enjoy ED to come up with a new engine or something that make DCS that much more appealing and immersive so that it can visually be of high standard and keep being a top reference for years to come.

I think CA really can be an awesome module that makes for great multi sessions, and on paper its absolutely awesome, but right now when you actually look at the product meh. I've decided to buy it afterall just to help in showing DCS there's an interest for it and to give that little extra support while taking advantage of the summer sale but that's really with hopes they work on a new engine in the near future in which case I might even play it!

Personally I found Lock On on Amazon (Europe) for about 5 Euros (box retail version only sadly), if you're in the US though you can easily buy a digital version for about the same price I think through the links provided on the FC3 shop page.

Impressive carrier model indeed, such an incredibly low poly count for a model of that size, considering the rather recent computers that handle millions & millions of polys at a time. DCS engine is aging quite fast though tbh, some higher poly models would be welcome, although I guess it's no use to invest time in too great models if most of your engine looks 'outdated' anyway, hence their focus on a new IG maybe.

Personally I enjoy DCS for the A-10C and its high level of details & realism, still during this summer sale I bought FC3 (and the mandatory Lock on -__-) to have plenty of planes to have fun with in both solo & multiplayer, in a more casual manner. Mostly I did it to support ED and throw some more cash at them as I will mostly stick to the A-10C, but it's nice to know in multiplayer I can can take part in any mission or any role that it needs me to, especially considering the new highly detailed 6dof cockpits and upcoming AFM. Also I think these casual planes makes for a great way to learn all the tactics, weaponry, anti-air, AI behavior in an easy to fly and operate aircraft rather than in a simulated aircraft like the A-10C that is a challenge to operate on its own. I just hope ED doesn't take it as a sign to dedicate more resources to casual modules that the highly detailed ones so I also bought both helicopters to support ED & 3rd parties but I probably won't fly them any time soon, I mean love helis, more than fixed wings, but these two models just doesn't tickle my fancy. I'd have bought the Combined Arms module but I just really cannot stand being that close to the 1990s terrain and the (lack thereof) soldier/vehicles animations, I just want to be up in the air and forget about it all ^^. That would be my incentives for FC3.

I'm quite curious at the price mark they'll aim for and the stretch goals, it would be lovely if they'd manage to grab enough cash to build up main variants.

Indeed multi-role aircraft when done right is absolutely awesome in so many ways, budget efficiency is one of them if not THE perk of it. But from what I understand the multi-role base design of the F-35 is its , "too heavy to be a good fighter yet too fast, thin-skinned and lightly armed to be be a viable air to ground support". Some specialists are saying that, hopefully, the F-35 just won't be matched against a capable Air Force in its life time. But oh well who knows what the 5th gen warfare, if any, will be like. Personally I think it can be an extraordinary aircraft but that will take a whole lot of more years, billions and upgrades for that to happen, I just hope it does in time. Getting Curiosity on Mars cost 2.5 billions, so far the F-35 cost is on its way to 600, all the things we could do if Earth would unite.

Yes I agree with you, and it being a plane going through shakedowns, still in development and that hasn't even went through half of its test runs means for me it's not the first aircraft I was looking forward to pilot in a highly detailed simulator like DCS, I don't think that's too hard to digest. I didn't say anything about the F-35 supposed to be running perfectly and ready from day one and the whole project being a shame if it didn't IRL. Now about F-35's cost, well direct comparisons are always very hard to do, even for experts (despite inflation it's just wild guess at future costs in terms of fuel,man wages, resources, materials prices, aircraft sales etc which means so much in an aircraft final price), but one can gather a whole lot of information about that subject in the medias and if there's one thing that no expert debates is the fact that the F-35 is a huge mess financially, constantly threatened by various US authorities that have a say in the US budget be them officials or consultants, the project was at first estimates "the costliest weapons system in U.S. history and the single most expensive item in the 2013 Pentagon budget" and still these estimates doubled and we're just halfway there from what I understand & on its way to being tripled, maintenance and cost per hour in the air is still too high to be viable which forces countries to reconsider their plan to buy F-35s like Canada for one (which obviously would raise the plane's cost even more) when other countries that must acquire the F-35 because they took part of the r&d cost faces raising controversies like Italy for exemple. Tbh, The only financially good thing you can hear about the F-35 is the die-hard backers of the project that says it's getting better and better every time they're given a chance to communicate (which I hope is true). I'm not even mentioning about the plane design in itself and pilots concerns that raises regularly because I still think it can be a great fun in DCS if the amount of detail is on par to what we're used to, and it looks damn sexy! I feel like a party popper in this thread though so I think I'll just shut it and hopefully catch up with you guys online a year from now enjoying our brand new JSF. :] About the game balance yea I agree that servers can & would have to manage it, that sure would be a great solution. Like you I think a server full of F-35 only wouldn't be too fun, though from what I gathered kinneyinteractive is planning on creating and supporting F-35 oriented servers with custom scenarios and drills, that could offer some good times indeed!

Don't get me wrong I do hope the F-35 and it's variants ends up being a big success and financially viable given how deep the US and other contractors got their heads in that huge and challenging project and simply just cannot afford to start from scratch now. But I doubt the troubles the F-35 faces in terms of development and more importantly the astronomic cost issues can really be compared to troubled R&Developments in the past. It is unprecedented and basically is an exercise 'on how not to run a major acquisition effort' as one just has to look at the numbers and numerous officials statements to realize the whole project walk on thin ice indeed. Although, maybe that's a bit out of subject here and there's obviously enough matter for that debate to have a thread of its own. :) I was merely raising a point about the F-35 not being viable IRL so far and the near future (hopefully that'll change) which haven't taken part in any war theater. I'm not judging it, that's just known facts that influences my love and/or reticence for an aircraft or another, in this case the F-35; which on paper looks awfully cool and sexy and that translate in-game to fun bars. That's all we're after in the end. I will still backup that project regardless like I've previously stated (if the plan is to reach the level of detail of other modules). :)

Really hope weather effects will be reworked soon. Visual immersion means so much in such simulators and rain/bad weather can make for such incredible scenes and emotions.

I'm kinda disturbed by this news, on one hand I think it's always so nice to have a new aircraft to enjoy in the DCS universe and as a result I probably will end up backing that project regardless of my preferences, if only just to support DCS and enrich its module library. On the other hand I really think the F-35 is quite a terrible module choice for three main reasons: - Apparently that plane is a disaster IRL whether it's in term of performance because of malfunction or various failures so far or in terms of cost and unmanageable maintenance cost/hour of flight which tbh, wouldn't make me proud of flying such an iconic failure (thus far). Not to mention it hasn't even been in a single war op I believe? -Obviously all that will be ignored while simulating the F-35 in DCS; which means it will focus on what the plane is supposed to be on paper: an incredibly stealthy and effective 5th generation JSF that supposedly will just be vastly superior to every other air module that DCS offers and will offer. It supposedly render any other aircraft (of the same role at least) ineffective. -Finally, it's (apparently relative) lack of proper intel and specs on such a recent aircraft simply means a tremendous amount of liberty and wild guess have to be taken to develop it. Still like I said, I will support it and hope for the best. ;)

Bien le bonjour, Je cherche à acheter d'occasion un palonnier SIMPED-F16 dans sa version USB. Si l'un de vous en a un en bon état qui prend la poussière je suis preneur, si tant est que le prix soit raisonnable. N'hésitez pas à me contacter ici ou par mp ! Bon vol :)