AndyJWest

Yes, it definitely either will or won't come out today. Maybe...

Seems to have been fixed in the latest MT open beta:

So is the heat death of the universe...

Same for me. I own the original Normandy map. It says I've already got 2.0, which I haven't. Price & discount seem right, so I could just chance it and purchase, but I'd rather be sure this isn't going to screw things up further.

The only thing I've noticed with the latest beta is that the TPOD won't always lock to the ground at extreme range. This may well be intended behaviour, and not evident before while the TPOD view cut out abruptly at 40 NM.

The FAQ was changed at some point in the last few hours - it now says "Currently, users with more than 32 threads should disable HT/SMT, but for everyone else we recommend enabling HT/SMT." It would probably be wise for YoYo to note this in the first post.

Looks bashed about a bit. Is that normal?

Vortex generators.

Yeah, not difficult, just stupid...

Start here: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/230609-new-streamdeck-plugin/

Seems to be MSFS only. See the Kickstarter 'comments' page: It communicates with MSFS with SimConnect - a MSFS-specific API.

I've just installed, but this profile doesn't seem to work for me (current openbeta, Streamdeck XL). Profiles seem to be working for other modules. Anyone else having issues? Edit: Never mid, figured it out - I'd somehow not got the right ExportScript library installed. No Mi-24P.lua file, so it obviously wouldn't work...

Popularity is rarely an indicator of usefulness.

Many thanks!

Anyone else found that selecting 'Ka-50_3' in the ID Lookup Window for the Streamdeck Plugin shows no data? EDIT: To answer my own question, there is currently no Ka-50_3.lua file in the DCS-ExportScript\ExportsModules folder. Creating one is probably beyond my patience and/or capabilities, but hopefully someone will come up with it at some point. Hopefully it reuses much of the data from the existing Ka-50.lua file.

Yup. Same issue for me.

Scoring seems not to be working in SP either, at least for A/G.

Discuss the idea and feasibility? OK. Idea: Bad. There are lots of first-person shooters already. Created by developers who know how to make them, and want to. DCS makes its money doing what it already knows. Why chose to compete, in a saturated market, with people who've been doing it for years? Feasibility: Low. No game engine trying to combine a first-person shooter with study-level air combat simulation is ever going to be able to perform as well as engines designed expressly for either. Too different, with contradictory requirements in core areas. And at the end of the day, even if someone were to come up with something that worked, you'd rapidly run into 'gameplay' issues with the very different scales at which combat takes place. The first-person shooters will be fighting each other over a frontline that the pilots will fly over in seconds. They'll be lucky if they even notice they are there.

A bit of STOL stuff.

Two entirely differing approaches to design.

And, if you don't want extra excitement, figure out which way it is going. A head-on rendezvous doesn't really work, and I won't be trying that again...

No.

Two weeks * Mach 2.4 / SNECMA + Ooh la-la = 7.37 Austro-Hungarian Krone. Or thereabouts...

For a moving carrier, to get the resultant wind straight down the angle, it needs to come from a direction somewhat to the left of that, and be sufficiently strong to be able to compensate for the angle - the exact angle depending on the relative ship and wind speeds.