Buzzles

All these comparisons to the F-16 are amusing, mostly because they're utterly moot while we don't have a pilotable one in DCS. More interesting would be comparisons to the Mig29 and Su-27, which is what you're going to be facing in multiplayer and SP missions.

+1

I think your definition of obvious differs from mine. Until people started mentioning it recently in relation to the 2.5 update, I didn't know having multiple versions installed in multiple locations was a thing at all.

As you're disparaging the FM with no details and I've not flown the '21 for a while, can you say what is currently wrong with it? There's a thread about potential issues with critical AoA and another for roll inertia, but that's it as far as I can see. The ASP does need to be redone though.

Even though I posted what I did simply as a possible example of a shared service for cylinder temp, to further what you've just raised because you've made me think on it even though you've moved the goal posts: They're not fundamentally different as you think they are. Air and water are both fluids. Yes, there's various parameters to the fluid, but going abstract the only functional differences here is if the moving fluid is travelling internally through the cylinder or around its outer casing, which is only cared for when figuring out how much heat can be dumped. The detail about if it's a closed loop or not (buffers, flaps etc...) would be calculated in steps before and after the cylinder temp calulator and is irrelevant to it. You're working out your params for the working fluid before they hit the cylinder and after (once fluid has increased in temp). Yes, you'd end up writing a sub modules to handle the types of loop, but that's just another part of bigger system. With a radial, it's likely the post calculation info can be discarded, while for inline the post will feedback to the next calcultion of the pre-calc info. We are talking about a piece of game code, it's likely going to be called once per tick of the simulation, and you can certainly hold on to information to pass to the next tick. This is all just an example though, but if I can come up with it in about 5 minutes, pretty sure ED will have already built a system which does it and supports our conjecture that any modelling upgrades can hopefully be ported to other engine types.

Nothing public. Wags has said "when, not if" when asked.

I've had no issues. Normally reverting to the A-10c is something relating to it not being authorised properly. Has your firewall blocked the copy protection exe? And have you tried unticking and reticking the enabled box in the module manager?

Doing a horrible thing and bumping this as 2.5 is out. 0,0,0 knob tops aren't a real thing. They used to be properly textured back at launch. Can one of the ED test team please see if this is logged?

M2000 changes are hardly ninja, Razbam have posted a changelog: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3373315&postcount=360

The launch video in the OP is very, very good. I assume it's a GA video as it doesn't say who made it.

Don't forget to delete your cached shaders directory as well in Saved Games/DCS/... Sometimes with an update, you have to do that to make everything hunky dory.

Derp. Already posted earlier.

:surprise: He's from the future!

You know, this thread tells me whoever does make an F-16 is: Going to need to be extremely explicit in their choice of variant, going right down to which sub block they've chosen. Going to have to manage the disappointed people who complain it's not the particular F-16 they want with the particular features they want.

You will get a bug report on day one saying they're in the wrong position, and probably much gnashing of teeth for that decision once someone cracks out a cockpit schematic.

What Vitormouraa is on about is underlying tech being shared. F'instance, say you write a simplistic cylinder temperature calculator. You might make it so one of the params given to it for the cylinder you're about to calculate contains the current temp of the adjacent cylinders, the size of gap between them and what that gap is made of....then you could apply it to both radial and in-line. The difference in the static data would obviously be the gap size and gap type, first being metal and the second being much smaller for inline. Obviously if your current inline model just represents an average temp across the block as a whole, you've now got the ability to upgrade said model to use the above functionality and get more detailed representation and have differing temps. YoYo has said before there's a thermal model for the current WWII birds, so I'd imagine they're just going to expand it to handle both types of engine.

Well, we'll get the patchnotes on the 31st...

Batumi. Everything starts at Batumi!

DC-3 (well, C-47) was mentioned a few times. Put me down as a +1 for that.

Fair enough, g'luck!

Not to be mean, but you said you were stopping all work on all other projects less than a month ago to focus on the F-84: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3339280#post3339280 What made you change your mind and pick up all these little extra mods?

Don't think it was announced. Wags does tend to do ad-hoc ones every now and again, often on Sundays.

If including SpeedTree has a performance benefit over the current tech, then it very nice to see it investigated for Normandy regardless of it being a 3rd party map.

No. HB's new one is not yet in DCS. What's currently in DCS is ED's many years old one, for use by the old AI F-14.

Pretty cool! How does Jester get on with this?