Dagger71

Dan was the OP on that thread. ED stated it was not a bug, and the two windows account was the solution. It's not a bug.

It probably comes down to symantics, but the point I was trying to make is when you make the TGP point SPI, there will be a SPI entry for that middle point, if you move it, it will change, that I agree with . Same with Steerpoint SPI. BUT it's two completely different entries, one is the steerpoint and the other is the SPI. Same with markpoints, you can make the markpoint SPI, change the markpoint and two entries will change, the markpoint and the new SPI location. You can call it a SPI generator, but it's not referred to that by the AF, because they are two different entries, even though they will have the same info (coordinates, and alt). But only the SPI entry can get passed through to other units, whether in your flight or not. Hooking a new SPI is just that. Hooking a SPI from a different source, regardless of what sensor they used to create the SPI.

Sorry not following you, not sure what convoluted by my statement. But it does not work as you say. "Make SPI" actually does not interact with the sensor or give it any commands. It simply copies the value in the SPI entry to be used in the future until it is overwritten.

Not quite. It's actually an entry that defines a point in space. When SPI is being created by say the TGP or Maverick, the entry will be continuously updated when slewing the sensor. As per USAF: "The SPI is defined as the point in three-dimensional space that the system uses as a unique reference for other functions, such as weapons delivery, off-board transmission, and sensor slaving." This entry is stored in Aircraft Position and Target Designation (APTD) The SPI entry contains: SPI Entity ID Serial Number (EISN) and Originator URN/Call Sign SPI Coordinates (Lat/Long or MGRS) SPI elevation (MSL/HAE) So what "Make SPI" actually does, when say TGP is SOI, is sends the command to store the point in the center of the TGP as the SPI entry.The fact that the TGP can be slewed is irrelevant, as the SOI information is not stored, but slewing the TGP will update the SPI position, until a new sensor creates a new SPI, or you hook a different SPI, or even make a Mark point SPI! This becomes more important when Flight Member SPI, and Donor (non flight member) SPI's are broadcast. The SOI used to create the SPI is ignored and only the SPI entry itself is copied over.

If that is your reasoning for having it, then I and most would 100% be against it! We don't need non carrier jets taking over the carriers like this! Please just no.

M2K C were not fitted with D2M only the D version was. So after people debating this on the forums for ever, I believe the option to remove it was added (can't remember if this was an option since release). The A64D we are getting is from 2005 which had the CMWS by default, so I doubt there will an option to remove it in the mission editor.

What does having a collidable object have anything to do with MP server policies? Besides having collidable objects, equates to server having many times more calculations based on the tracked objects, essentially increasing the amount of objects by several times (not a big deal on smaller servers but some servers, using dynamic campaigns have 1200-3000 objects). This is not feasible for the near future.

I think this would be considered a form of ramming and probably get you kicked off more servers.

Almost all multi engine planes had individual throttle control. Some with separate levers, some with switches.

#27 provided by VampireNZ post. And can also be found in copilot cockpit (red pedal damper switch) And to answer your previous question The warning annunciator is about the high push rate (deflection rate) and I believe can also light up without damper active (at higher deflection rates) It is a warning. High pedal push rate= potentially dangerous maneuver

If you are still trying to get around the server ban, use two separate windows account and follow silver devil’s link. Otherwise you will end messing up other DCS config files.

Isn't this just their PvE training server? But either way, You should really be posting this on their own forum thread.

It should actually ask more: "Are you REALLY sure you want to start your trial?" Followed up by "You REALLY REALLY sure?"

I know of at least one who openly discusses bypassing bans on these forums "And even if some DCS players are using more than 1 account to "bypass bans", maybe they have quite good reasons to bypass it, have you ever considered that? "

oh the irony of this post!!!