Flagrum

backup contains files that were changed compared to the regular version of the installation - i.e. if you had mods installed when you ran the autoupdater. the download folders are used during an update. they temporarily contain the new files that are to be installed. that way you can stop the update at any time and it will restart at that point without having to download everything again. after an successful update both folders are pretty much useless.

I haven't tried it from the main menu, yet, but I changed my controls setup from within a mission. There the transparent controls window was a bit hard to read - with all the cockpit and Normandy in the background.

After manually installing Normandy and the WWII Asset Pack, I noticed that both modules have no "Serial Number" button in the module manager. And I had to enter my serial number for the asset pack right away when I first started DCS after the install and for Normandy after switching to the map in the mission editor. Seems to me as if the association between my install/login and my DCS shop account is somehow not there for those two modules - which then was probably also the reason why they did not show up in the module manager initially. But they both seem to be workings, though *knocks on wood*.

Germany is on the way to Normandy! (erm, updating from GER is now working! ;-)

Autoupdater does not "see" the 2.1 update ...?

Autoupdater of neither Open Beta nor Open Alpha is detecting that an update is available....?

Seems to be too extensive to put that configuration onto that special settings tab in the mission editor. But could you perhaps implement it in a way that we have several of these config files - i.e. one separate file for each map? Because it would be a bit annoying if we had to exchange the file (or even edit the file) each time we want to fly on a different map.

Hrm, "usually later afternoon" ... is that Moscow time or is that now Lausanne time? (okok, I'll see myself out, no need to hand out warnings! ;-)

Maybe the devs could confirm that this is being looked into ...?

Yes, it will be difficult to find that insurgent truck that is hiding under a tree without having exact coordinates or nav aids in our A-10C. And that, although, as someone stated correctly, the A-10 was initially designed to fly over Europe. But we have to keep in mind, the A-10 over Europe is something entirely different than an A-10 over Afganistan (that we usually try to replicate in Georgia ...). A-10 over Europe is NOT COIN! If there were COIN to be performed over Europe, then it would most likely not be done in an A-10. The A-10 over Europe fights masses of tanks at the FEBA - which should be easier to spot than one or two ragheads (if it moves east to west, shoot it!).

I think that providing patches/updates to three branches (technically more "versions" of the same code base) is not too dificult - ED has with the autoupdater a quite decent tool for that. But maintaining these three versions might add some additional effort internally for ED. By far not as much as maintaining different versions of even different code bases, but still. And to be honest: I don't really see the benefit for keeping a public Alpha version - neither for ED, nor for us customers. It will lead only to confusion again ... Besides, official terminology is now "early access", right? So I would be completely happy with one Stable Release and one Early Access version ...

Two thoughts: 1. You can edit your own postings - one updated posting would be much better readable and convinient than this huge thread of single links. 2. If you don't care about the low audio quality of your videos, it leaves the impression that you not really care or don't mind if anyone is even watching your videos? It might sound harsh, but really, why do you invest all the work into making these videos but on the other side can't be bothered to make them at least somewhat ... watchable?

That sounds as if you were just coming out of translational lift and not that you are about to enter VRS. VRS is only a threat if your airspeed is less than about 20 kph (iirc) - i.e. when you slowing down and thus leaving the translational lift region. What I would try if I were you: keep the collective where it is a bit longer and the shaking should stop eventually. And as you are entering in-ground-effect, drop the collective a bit more. NOW be very carefull to not enter VRS ...

Nein. Hawkeye60 ist kein 3rd Party Dev. Er und ein paar andere haben wohl an Upuauts Mod weitergearbeitet und verbessert - aber es ist und bleibt immernoch "nur" ein Mod.

Maybe US troops found a star gate in Germany after the war and stashed it away at some secret location. Now think about the Nazis on the moon, the technology and the implicit possibilities! Not from the east coast. Not from the west coast. Not even from Mexico or Canada ... this time they come from GROOM LAKE! :alien:

also be aware of crosswinds

:thumbup:

I haven't much experience, yet, with this aircraft. But I got the impression from the RL manuals that radar ranging should play an important role, too. From what I gathered, some delivery procedures make use of the radar ranging (i.e. those where you actually dive, like ANF BOMB DYKE). The delivery procedure is performed in several phases where the first requires a good QFE setting for the initial alignment, but then switches to radar ranging for precission. Iirc, radar ranging is active when the small vertical bar (the "fin") is displayed on the HUD.

Guess who is also surprised by that fact ...

+1! At least a few changes made it into todays update - i.e. Control mappings CW/CCW for the big rotaries. But what else?

No servo = moving the stick needs more force, correct? How could that be modelled anyways? Ignoring the user setting and apply maximum FFB forces? And even if we would want that - what if the user has set the forces already to maximum?:smartass:

NTTR and 2.0 are beta version (well, alpha versions, to be precise) ... so I don't see how that would create bad feelings?

Because what I wrote as "Second" is all the FFB effects that you get in these helos. Don't ask me about the technical details, but there is no "back channel" from the rotor to the cyclic - the whole thing is also called "artificial feel system" (iirc), as it adds a tactile feedback to the pilot only by artificial means, not by the real forces that act upon the rotor or the airframe.

Öhm, das sind doch alles nur links auf mehr als vagen "na, vielleicht"-aussagen von vor einem halben Jahrzehnt ... Ich würde erstmal von einem "Nope" ausgehen hinsichtlich der Frage "sind deutsche Flieger geplant?"... Eher sehen wir ne F-16 und nen AH-64 ... imo.

First, make sure that you have Force Feedback enabled in the DCS Options. Second, both helos use the so called "force trim" system. Using hydraulic pressure, the cyclic is kept in position and you have to apply some force with your hands to actually move it. If you depress the trim button, the hydraulic pressure is released and you can move the cyclic freely. As soon as you release the trim button, hydraulic pressure is applied again and the stick then is held at its new position. Uhm, and third, with a MS FFB2 you will have to play around a bit with the FFB axes and invert one of the two (X or Y ... can't recall right now which one) at the control setup page.