Flagrum

Mit den verschiedenen Änderungen an Forumsregel 1.16 im Laufe der letzten zwei Wochen und der damit einhergehenden Willkürlichkeit bei der Forumsmoderation geht jeder von uns mit jedem Posting das Risiko ein, sich eine Perma Warnung oder gar Bans einzuhandeln. In diesem Klima sehe ich es für mich nicht als angebracht, weiterhin zu versuchen, konstruktiv am ED Forum teilzunehmen. In diesem Sinne ... macht's gut! -- Flag, fencing out PS: falls sich jemand wundert, worum es geht ...

At the start of May, the forum rule 1.16 was considerably tightened up so that it is now also forbidden to talk about content, which is covered in documents that are subject to rule 1.16. My understanding is, that the change of the rule is presumed to be retroactively active. And yet, there are postings that are not moderated at all in this regard - older postings, but also postings made after the change. Of the postings, that were moderated, the moderation does not neccessarily adhere to the new wording of rule 1.16. For example, some people where banned, others were not, perma warnings where handed out or not at all. The way, the change of the rule is communicated to the community is also obscure by itself. There are currently several different wordings online, which were confusingly published at different dates during the last two weeks: - forum rules: currently, the russian translation reads the old text (referencing docs not forbidden, no 20% perma warning, no ban) while the english translation mentions since early may a ban and a 20% warning, but without "perma" - forum header note was recently updated to state a 20% perma warning, ban and possible future consequences Not to mention that punishments were already applied while everywhere the original wording was still in place. Why is this process so highly intransparent and arbitrary?

I think, you got the TERM settings wrong. As I understood your video, you set it up to match your (aircrafts) planned approach the targets. But afaik the settings are supposed to tell the weapon how it shall approach the target. That means, you can specifiy that the bomb should drop right on top of it (90°), or from the side (i.e. 45°). Also the heading is supposed to tell the weapon, from which direction it shall hit the target (if ANG is less than 90° ofc). Same for the speed - shall the bomb penetrate as far as possible or not? All these parameters are of course set to sensible values - makes no sense to set a desired speed of, i.e., 5 kts or so.^^ And yes, "sensible parameters" can also mean, that you set an attack heading reciprocal to your aircraft inbound heading (i.e. bomb hits the TGT from behind). But for that, the bomb will have to maneuver quite a lot and will lose a lot of energy - so the optimal drop zone will be much smaller than usual.

I find active pause useful. It gives you time as it prevents your aircraft from crashing or from changing attitude (i.e. keeps your sight where it is) while keeps the simulation of your avionics, ballistics and everything around you running. And that is important: a lot of stuff, that is going on, is time dependant - the sequence of flipped switches, the duration of certain actions, etc. is often important. Imagine a cold start, while in complete pause mode. You flip a dozend switches and do all kind of stuff for 5 minutes. Then you unpause - how shall the simulation handle that - without any turbine spool up time happened, warm up times happened, etc.? Just from 0 to 100% in just a milisecond that passed in DCS World between pause and unpause?

That is already the outspoken goal of DCS. Yes, it is not perfect and there is always room for improvement, but something lapidar like "I wish DCS were better" won't cut it, afaik. You will need to be more specific than that. But be aware, be prepared to back up your claims with facts - a "it feels a bit off" will, again, not cut it. :-)

Huh? OFF is the most downward position, GUN is one step "up". Yeah, maybe you have to depress the switch to be able to move it forward (I actually don't know), but why would you want to have that modelled? If you are asking for something like that, then you should also ask for the bigger switches that have to be pulled out a bit in order to be moved ...

c) yes, 3+3 is quite inaccurate, but the JTAC also lases for you - so there is no real advantage to be more precise anyways. (although I am not sure if this is true just by accident in this specific case, or if the JTAC would give more precise coords if he requested for example a JDAM)

If you post this in random forums, it's no wonder that your personal favourite glitch is not treated with the priority that a Mizzy Bug Report certainly deserves...

Maybe. But as the feature is not enabled yet, ED is probably very well aware of what and where it needs improvement.

Maybe there is a reason why they are not enabled by default, yet?

If you are going to redo the captions for the video ... you might perhaps want to reconsider the typography as well. I.e. use not so many different - and not so "fancy" fonts. I'd stay rather conservative ("classy" ^^) with the fonts I'd use.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3863777#post3863777

Yes, exactly what I would have expected and what I now even actually get. The problem before was related to excessive pagefile activity - I still have no idea what the real cause for that was. Perhaps just a clogged up Windows that ran for too long before I started DCS ...

i5 3.2 Ghz, 16MB RAM, GTX970 (latest drivers), SSD. Win7 No, I tried it right after installing the latest hot fix, published on friday - it made no difference. BUT ... it is odd. I followed the advices given here in return and deleted the shader folders (had it done only after the regular update, not after fridays hot fix). AND it deleted the F-14 from CoreMods and Mods in the DCS install folder and had DCS repair it. Not sure, if that was it or just that I had started DCS directly after a reboot ... but at least over Caucasus the Cat now flew just fine! So, I stand corrected and apologize for my outburst earlier... :cry: The F-14 is probably more demanding and requires a bit more housekeeping on the system it is running on, if that does not exactly have an abundance of ressources. So, in the end, I blame now my system more than the F-14.

Jester sets the wrong TACAN channel when asked to "Tune Tac Radio". He sets the numeric part one to high, instead of i.e. 82Y he sets 83Y. The attached test mission contains two tankers, one TK1 is set to 81Y and TK2 to 82Y. When Jester tunes TACAN to TK2, he sets 83Y and when asked to tune to TK1, he sets 82Y - which leads us to TK2 instead. ME setting: TK1 / 81Y / S-3B Tanker TK2 / 82Y / KC-135MPRS f14 1.miz

Yeah, what do those filthy casuals even think what DCS is about? It's called Digital Cold Start for a reason...

With the Harrier or the F-18 I don't have it either. This and your experience tells me this: something is weired with the F-14. I know why my F-14 is lagging so bad: my system spends most of the time fiddling around with the page file, swapping stuff in and out. I assume, it is the terrain textures, that change when flying over ground and that need space in RAM - and therefore other stuff has to be parked on the page file. So, what is clogging up my RAM so that no terrain textures fit in anymore? You have 32 GB RAM - double the size of mine. That might actually help a lot, I guess. But on the other hand, all other modules are performing much better for me, even with "only" 16 GB.

After todays update: Loading times seem to be substancial better than before, but you really, really, REALLY notice that the F-14 is meant to be flown in a maritime environment. As soon as dry dirt is appearing beneath the aircraft, the slideshow begins. Tried Caucasus now, as the Persian Gulf was not much better than before. Leaner terrain textures ... that was my hope. Tried to bomb the abandoned airfield, coming from the sea. Rolling in was like 20° roll, 10 sec pause, another 25°, 20 sec pause, 50°, 15 sec pause, omg, must correct ... holding stick still for 30 sec, roll 60° in opposite direction, etc. un. fly. able. Gave up, killed DCS with the task manager (that's 5 minutes faster than windows orderly releasing 16GB of RAM that is parked on the pagefile.sys). Might try later again, but you might have guessed it, I am a bit too annoyed right now.

Death Valley. Fun-Fact: Death Valley liegt sogar tiefer als 0 MSL - und das hat zu beginn zu DCS crashes geführt, wenn man unterhalb des Meeresspiegels geflogein ist. ^^

I can't think of any situation where sliding/gliding on melted rubber would be more effective than a few percent less braking effectiveness compared to a "perfect braking" (which neither ABS nor humans could probably archive anyways).

Looked still wrong to me - the ASL was still swaying left and right a lot. The ASL also never really coincidented with the target marker, even when he dropped the weapon, he was heading about 10-15 degree right according to the ASL - but thanks to laser guidance he still got that kill.

You should consider making stand up comedy as your way of making a living.

(https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=235973) Wohoo! :thumbup: Looking forward to it!

After todays hotfix it seems that ED changed when the "Fly!" dialog appears during the loading process of a mission. Before, it already showed up although seemingly not all loading was finished. That probably lead to many concurrent load attempts of all kinds of stuff - fps dropped. Now the "Fly!" dialog just appears after all loading really has been concluded - and voila, the F-14 is now more responsive. But the load time is still the same for me - now I am just forced to really wait until DCS is ready to go. So, that was not really a fix of the problem, I think. While I was waiting for the "Fly!" dialog to eventually appear, I monitored my system (Ressourcemonitor of Win7): the majority of the time the system was bussy accessing all kind of texture .dds files of the F-14. And it was constantly swapping memory out to the pagefile - which costs an additional heck of a long time- 2019-03-18 17:36:50.142 INFO VISUALIZER: Preload() camera=-159595.570872, 5047.189476, 63359.535720 radius=34500.000000 2019-03-18 17:36:50.142 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: ITerrainGraphicsImpl4::forceLoading(): pos=(-159596, 5047.19, 63359.5), radius=34500 2019-03-18 17:36:51.528 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up LOD 0: left 4 released 80 2019-03-18 17:36:51.528 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up 774.886873 ms 2019-03-18 17:37:36.137 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up LOD 1: left 8 released 76 2019-03-18 17:37:36.137 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up 4729.904429 ms 2019-03-18 17:37:40.891 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up 0.000311 ms 2019-03-18 17:37:44.730 INFO EDTERRAINGRAPHICS41: surface5 clean up 0.000000 ms 2019-03-18 17:39:02.166 INFO GRAPHICSVISTA: Creating Resource "Unicode" of type 1 2019-03-18 17:41:23.535 ERROR_ONCE DX11BACKEND: texture 'bake2pan_normals' not found. Asked from 'NGMODEL' 2019-03-18 17:49:36.999 INFO VISUALIZER: Preload() finished Just look at the time stamps at the end ... To me, this looks like DCS is trying to squeeze in all the F-14 textures, but can't. So it swaps out other stuff to the page file. When I then fly over PG landmasses, everytime DCS loads further map data, it first accesses the pagefile - to swap out some other less important stuff. So ... all the F14 textures seem to clog up my system REAL good... System: i5 2500K, 3.2 GHz, 16 GB RAM, GTX970, DCS on SSD