some1

In most cases too hard to justify doing it for free, and too easy to justify selling them as a separate product.

He wrote he doesn't play multiplayer, so it doesn't matter how many years of MP experience you have. I also did not write about DCS memory usage, or the "in use" value, but total committed memory. That's what's important in relation to pagefile - when committed memory exceeds physical memory available, pagefile starts being used. Want to really see how much of pagefile is really being used, you can always do that with built in system tools https://support.tilaa.com/hc/en-us/articles/228651847-How-to-see-swap-pagefile-usage-in-Windows-

Not really. It comes into play if committed memory exceeds the amount of physical memory. In this case, if the pagefile is too small, Windows will start to increase it and shuffle things around, so it can stutter for a while. An if the upper pagefile limit is still too small, DCS or something else in the system will crash. For a guy with 64 GB ram playing SP, a 32GB pagefile is simply overkill. I mean sure, it's a safe support answer, worst case scenario it will just waste some free space on SSD.

From my experience playing with large pagefile won't help in this situation. Sure, setting a pagefile to a fixed size won't hurt, but the RAM is not the problem, the problem is that the GPU gets hammered by F-14 model and textures. The only solution is to dial down pixel density and/or Steam supersampling setting, whichever you choose, to give GPU more headroom.

This gentleman will gladly sell you an F-4E with 9Ms, a year supply of argon and a free complimentary load of chaff and flares

Many pedal designs do not return exactly to centre. It's typical for cam based models that have no centre detent. I have a joystick with no centre detent and the same problem with autopilots in other aircraft. They sometimes refuse to engage simply because my stick is not dead in the middle position.

That would require you to have a deadzone in the hardware or in the DCS curves, otherwise the AP would never activate. But the adjustable AP deadzone as an option in special settings tab would be the best.

The real pedals do not have a spring return to centre. They stay where the pilot put them.

Support the local industry. After all, Tornado is more British than the Phantom, even the one with RR engines. If they simply wanted the best interceptor for the money, they should have probably just buy F-15's instead of developing the whole platform. But that would mean more money sent abroad. Unpopular and less beneficial in the long term. Great stories guys, thanks for sharing

I limited the throw for helos below detent and have no problems with it. The levers still have a good throw and the electronics are precise enough to be a non issue. I previously used Warthog without detent for helos, so I'm coming from something with larger throw.

Even if you uncage to turn off LSS/LST, targeting pod and SPI are still not in sync, unless you move TDC. That doesn't seem right.

There are problems when attacking a target using LSS. 1. It is not possible to set SPI from LSS mode. TMS forward does not work and SPI remains where it was when LSS mode was activated. Not sure if that's correct or not, but it's possible to designate the target from LST in the A-10 or the Hornet. 2. If you exit LSS and switch to PTRK, the SPI still remains in the old position. That is clearly wrong. 3. Going TMS aft in such situation will snap TGP to old SPI position, loosing the target from sight. Currently the only method to make it work is to exit LSS mode, move TDC a bit, which will update SPI to the target's position, and then proceed with the attack. Attached short example track. 1. Target spotted in LSS, but SPI is in a different place. 2. Switched from LSS to Point track, but SPI still in the wrong place 3. Wiggled TDC a little, finally SPI has synced to target location. lss.trk

Sure, here it is https://easyupload.io/dfuu1i

Please don't create fake stories. When ED opened preorders in May 2019 and started taking money from people, they set themselves a release window of early autumn. That's not a year wide, in fact it's pretty narrow timeframe. I also don't remember demanding any early release, or any bargaining with ED. Never knew it's even possible to stuck such deal with a developer. Where do you sign up for that?

What I meant is that arguing that the current baked-in reflection are realistic is moot. Sooner or later, they will be removed.

There are certainly several new modules coming to DCS in 2022, some of them were initially planned for 2021. I've just realised that the last 3rd party aircraft released in DCS was JF-17 from Deka in 2019. Time flies. This year it looks like at least Razbam, Aerges and IndiaFoxtrot should release something, maybe also Polychop and even Heatblur if the stars align. Plus of course ED with 1-3 new products and improvements to the core simulator. Overall every year DCS gets gradually better than it was last year. Yeah, not as fast as we'd like, and it's sometimes two steps forward, one step back, but it's steadily improving.

No idea. But it's probably something that ED could fix in a few hours if they wanted to.

The problem here is with bad roughness maps. Everything painted black on the roughness map with have a glass finish in DCS. And there's a lot of stuff with black rouhness map in the Mi-8.

You can map it to a switch that stays in place, or use your joystick software to program a button like that.

Originally, LST switch was a 3-pos in DCS, ED patched it to 2-pos later. Easiest fix is to simply use 2 positions of the switch out of the three. 3-pos can still be useful if you decide to fly other aircraft.

No, it's been said that it may take longer if needed, so they don't seem to be tied to one another. But it sure is being teased on the trailers.

The whole argument is moot. ED has already implemented much more realistic dynamic reflections system which is being used in newer modules and that would solve the issue discussed in this thread. It's just L-39 is one of the old, low priority modules that haven't been updated yet.

I recently received my Orion throttle, overall good first impressions, but the thing I noticed was the very limited TDC movement, much smaller than with Deltasim Warthog mod, or the old Cougar throttle, or any gamepad ministick for that matter. The ministick on Orion throttle moved only about 2mm to each side before stopping, like here: I watched a few youtube reviews of the throttle, and it seems that on some units it works like on my throttle, but on some other it moves as far as the outer ring allows, which obviously provides much greater precision. Like here: Turns out the issue is really simple to solve. On my unit, the plastic ministick cap was pushed too far on the shaft, and it collided with the shaft cutout. I simply pushed the cap up a bit with a small screwdriver, so now it's free to move as designed. The cap sits tightly on the shaft and it hasn't moved back after a few days of use. But if that's not enough, you can remove the cap completely and put something inside the hole (paper, glue), so the shaft can't get so deep. Of course if you also had this problem and fixed it the way I described, you will need to recalibrate X/Y axes in the software to make use of the increased motion range.

Load F-15 with AIM-9P and AIM-7E. Remove the gun ammo.

Ah, yes, it's in the manual, but not implemented yet. Who does not love early access.