Noj

Sure, just uncheck the box and click on the download link - just did it myself to check all was okay :smilewink:

A bit late to this one - I'm not flying for some months at the moment due to other commitments. I uploaded the old training pages I use for reference. It is the training missions in text form - with different colours for commands etc - as presented on the old JaBog32 site, I think. I converted them to RTF pages and added some colour and the images. Even though it is for the original Flaming Cliffs, almost all of it is still relevant to FC3. http://www.datafilehost.com/d/29909ad9 You may need to hurry if you want to download - I think it gets deleted after a short time. Its about 73MB due to having to use zip rather than 7z :( I print these out and put them in a display book for easy reference - then you have the procedures for every aircraft at hand.

There is a world of difference between the FC titles and the likes of Hawx et al. I don't get people's polarised attitudes. Maybe I should say "selfish" attitudes? If there is a large market for FC type products, where is the problem with DCS making and selling them - especially if it's going to pay for the development of your very niche "High fidelity" aircraft. This "it takes effort away from the HiFi stuff" is a non argument. How much do you think the price for "HiFi" modules is going to go up, if the FC style products are ditched? Saying "I will pay more" is also a blinkered approach. You will - and maybe a few hundred others will. But then DCS will be either bust or have a vastly reduced output because they can't afford the staff to knock out new projects at a faster rate. I really don't get the selfish attitudes of "ditch that and build what I want!".

Convenient how it's always Window's fault - and not correct. I installed your mod, then started it from the desktop shortcut and it opened no less than 21 Firefox windows with over 1,000 tabs before I could get it stopped, all trying to open the Paypal page. It's a good job I know what I am doing or it would still be going now. Not only that, when I had logged off and back on, the next time I started Firefox it did exactly the same thing - even after having uninstalled EMC. That is what I call malware - intentional or not, doesn't matter - there is no excuse. :mad: What kind of person releases a 'free' mod that the first thing it does is open an internet browser to a 'donation' page? Very unimpressed. Go ahead and make your excuses - there isn't a valid one.

Just spotted this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CORGI-Bell-UH-1H-Huey-Helicopter-RAF-Rescue-464-UH-1-H-/300110878338 anyone fancy doing a paint? :music_whistling:

Probably - I use Textpad myself - it may have a similar function but I only ever used it for editing lua files and the like, so I don't know. Of course, Notepad++ is free, so probably more useful to most folks.

thanks for the link - worth checking out.

Problem here is that some recommended mods will overwrite others. For example, Mustang's "sky and terrain" file replaces the "High.lua" in Config/terrain, but so does the "Ultra high visibility" mod by Lightningstrike (linked to in post #8 ). So will have to use one or the other - or try and compare the two and edit one to include the other's settings, if possible. Which would probably be a PITA (I haven't checked yet) but in any case it warrants bearing in mind ;)

deleted

deleted

deleted

15465 UK Don't know the point of this thread - but there you go :)

just a note on my previous post - I don't mind what size the maps are, as long as they are large enough to do a reasonable mission on, they can cover a single small country or the whole universe - as long as there is some diversity of terrain I don't give a hoot. My point is that up to that post, it seemed like everyone was arguing for their little slice of the pie, instead of looking at what others may like. Hence saying that DCS/ED are likely to do what they think the majority will want, and not what "SIG" types do (Special Interest Groups - such as those who want to fly 5 hours to a fight or in Virtual Squadrons). Personally I like both types of mission - depending what mood I'm in and how much time I have (seeing as there is no option to save a mission on the go). I've spent weeks flying around the whole of the UK in real time (Farmstrips tour in FSX using VFR nav only - now there's a challenge ;) ) and yet in Air Hauler I use the sim-rate multiplier for just about every flight. I also spend a hell of a lot more time on 'joyrides' in DCSWorld - just enjoying flying the aircraft around the scenery - than I do in combat missions. So I really am not bothered about map size or mission flight length - anything will do. As for the "ED staff" comment - they are representing the company in one way or another, whether moderating or testing, therefore AFAIC they are ED staff. Alles klar :)

deleted

"some people like..." "virtual squadrons ..." these points are moot. Some people like flying for 5 hour missions - really? I bet most don't. Virtual squadrons? How many of ED/DCS customers belong to virtual squadrons? Not many, as a percentage of sales, I would say - and indeed as stated on these forums. So stating that these groups of people would want something a particular way is pretty much irrelevant. Do DCS want to make stuff for the minority of their customers, or potential customers, and therefore minimum sales, or for the 'mainstream' 'average Joe' DCS customer? I think it's the latter. Shame to see these kind of phrases used by ED staff - you surprise me.

imho the TM Warthog is a good HOTAS, but I don't worship the thing as some seem to. In fact, I find it can be really awkward for some sims or helicopters. I'm so pleased that I have alternatives to use for those (G940 is the HOTAS I use most - the FFB is a game changer, but have some basic ones, too, for older sims). The switches on the Warthog throttle are not ideal for some sims - again, the Ka50, for which you also would have to get used to the trimming system. Some do, some don't. If you don't, you'll hate Ka50 and never touch it. Just wanted to give an alternative view, as to me the Warthog has its faults, too ;) (also not the only one to think this - links to such views can be provided)

Yes, getting back to the subject at hand, I have pretty bad stutters in all 3 new 6DOF cockpits in FC3. I don't have any in the DCS aircraft, nor did I have any in v1.2.3 Later I'll do some tests and see exactly what framerates I'm getting. It definitely is not an aerodrome related issue, as it happens with air start missions, too. My rig main bits: SandyBridge i5 2500k @ 4.3GHz Asus P8P67 Pro 6GB Corsair 1600MHz DDR3 Gigabyte GTX560Ti OC 1GB Win7 H64

Well if EDGE is only for the Nevada map then it makes sod all difference to me, because I won't be buying that. They definitely said that there are other terrains that are waiting for EDGE to be completed. Can't remember if it was EB or EN, but one of the two said that a short time ago on a forum after some moans about same old area. Don't know how it can work that a terrain is ready, except for the architecture it will use - I'm no scenery coder - but this was definitely mentioned. Maybe he meant they are designed using the current code and will only be released once they are updated to EDGE. I'm on the EDGE of my seat... PS - I like this: You put it very well, matey ;)

Which is why I have been sniggering my way through it :) In fact, a similar issue seems to start an awful lot of 'debates' or arguments on these (and other) forums on all kinds of statements or posts by ED/DCS or their reps. Quite amusing to an observer.

Yummy! :thumbup:

:thumbup: I read threads like this because I find them immensely amusing!

Okay, flown UH-1H, A-10C, Ka50 (textures are messed up again on default missions such as free flight Sukhumi), P-51D and all just fine. However, I also tried the A-10A, Su-25 and Su-27 in FC3 and all were stuttering badly in the VC (but not when in external view). Coincidentally, that's all 3 new cockpits. Never had any stuttering before v1.2.4 in any module, and always had high settings.

okay I found some posts on it. Can't see a 'delete post' option - would be handy :)

Whatever, the view movement via TrackIR is fine now, and that setting is the only thing I changed. I'll be checking again later (and I'll try as many aircraft as I have time for) and see if the new update has made anything change - no idea what was in it, though. I see it does say "cockpit display".

I don't know why - I have upped the cockpit res from 256 (mystified why it was set at that) to 512 and now the UH-1 cockpit panning is smooth. I'll try the P-51 again and if it's still stuttering I'll report back. I've never had framerate issues in previous versions.