Extranajero

You do realise that if you take a DCS 3D model and load it into an engineering CAD program that the units of measurement bear no relationship to the real world ? The Hind cockpit is modelled to be about 3 real world millimetres long for instance. It doesn't matter in video game terms, but it'll matter a lot once you try to use it to make a cockpit, assuming it's for you and not your pet microbe. That's OK though because you can scale the model, but how do you know when you have the scale correct ? you need at least one known dimension to work to. For the majority of western aircraft the easiest thing to use is the width of the panels on the side consoles, they are almost always 146mm because the mounting holes follow a standard spacing. For a Russian aircraft you can use the clock. The bezel is 86mm in diameter, or at least the one I've got is.

That'll be very useful for him then, he can just plug the 3D model that he hasn't got into DCS ModelViewer. Does 'orthographic' mean the ability to view files that you don't have access to ?

One option - not the best but still do-able, would be to buy a Tamiya 1/32 scale F-4E and a set of vernier calipers. Build the cockpit and measure. There might well be a scan of an F-4E cockpit on one of the 3D asset sites - it's unlikely to be free but then cockpit building isn't cheap. The panels themselves are fairly easy, just take the Dzus standard width between the mounting screws and scale everything from that. My F-4J cockpit was built in an afternoon - constructed from cardboard with the gauges replicated in crayon. But I was 6, so not too bad an effort

Near future ? are you new to DCS ? But it would be nice to not have the RPG gunners stuck in a kneeling position and gliding along like hovercraft, even if it is hilarious.

Yes, but with the new multithreading I can watch my rockets not killing or suppressing enemies at 75fps instead of 65fps - I'm sure you'll agree that's a great improvement in a combat simulator.

The ways I can think of to use it are :- 1) Mark a target you want to keep your distance from, while doing another task 2) Send it to a wingman ( when that's added ) 3) Build a graphical picture on the TSD of an unknown battlespace 4) Draw a picture on the TSD of a smiley face - although that will require a very co-operative enemy

I'd rather tell people I was a furry than someone who flies pretend aeroplanes. I keep it to myself

Don't take the following as gospel, I could well be wrong... That looks very like a military simulator cockpit which was decommisioned, surplused and mounted on a motion platform. As far as I know there weren't any full motion F-4 simulators in use by the RAF. The flight model it uses will be almost certainly something coded for one of the modern civilian sims. The RAF bolted to the floor simulators ran their flight models using bad tempered analogue computers and literally miles of wiring. I've seen one that was removed from RAF Coningsby and it looked like an explosion in a cable factory. The out of the cockpit view on the RAF sim was provided by a small camera on a gantry that 'flew' over model terrain in a massive room. I think the very first simulators they had lacked any visual system at all. The simulators did have a combat aspect in that it was possible to perform intercepts with them, but I don't know how that worked in detail. It does look like a fun day out anyway

I hope to god they don't - those two are just fine as they are.

Shut Up And Die Like An Aviator - one of my favourite Steve Earle albums.

Well don't then

My vote would be for a physical control problem, double bind, something like that. The AH64 seems to go where it feels like compared to a normal helicopter, but it's nothing like what you are describing, certainly not unflyable. I'd suggest going through all your axis assignments again from the start. DCS "helpfully" auto assigns any new controllers and you can end up with fun and games like your rudder controlling your throttle. ED also like to do strange things to your control settings on many updates, I'm assuming this is to make sure we are all paying attention. You can fly the DCS helos with a standard consumer product length stick - in fact once you have a bit of familiarity you can fly them with a force sensing stick with almost no travel at all ( until you sneeze ) but adding an extension is really going to help you out. Try to get a cranked extension, many of the helos need quite an amount of forward cyclic for level flight at cruise settings and this can make your arm position uncomfortable.

The jets have changed radically now. Previously they just used to loop vertically and that was pretty frustrating. Now ED have revolutionised their behaviour by rotating the loop by 90 degrees, so they do endless flat turns at 9g instead without losing any speed. At least until they run out of fuel and crash. It's a big step forward.

You are just saying you deserve more banana pellets aren't you ?

And only the elite can cope with it right ?, the best of the best ? The biggest difference between DCS and other mainstream combat flight sims is the way you have to know which buttons to push and pull levers to pull ( and how to do it in the right order ) if you want to start a jet up. NASA, in the early days of the space program, managed to teach chimps how to do something similar, using electrics shocks and banana pellets.

It was a joke The AH64 is ridiculously heavy on resources, but it didn't actually scare my GPU

My 3080 tried to jump out of the case and run away to hide when I first ran the AH64. I caught it before it got very far though and refitted it. It's still nervous even after I told it that I don't like the AH64 and promised never to hurt it like that again.

So our video cards all have to explode so a tiny handful of people can make crappy " cinematics " ?

I reverse engineered a complete Porsche 908 classic race car ( less the engine ) into a 3D CAD model in a year of spare time. OK, it didn't need animation or textures because it was an engineering model, but every part needed to fit and work in real terms. And that year included learning 3D cad software from scratch. If I can do that, someone who already has the skills and who is working an 8 hour day as a job shouldn't have too many problems doing it in less time. I don't want full fidelity models if they have tens of thousands of useless polys eating my computer resources. I do want a nice cockpit and a reasonable quality external model. What the engine details look like just wastes developers time and much more importantly my frames. I don't fly using external view with all the maintenance panels open and I doubt anyone else does either.

It always amazes me that people can think that DCS is full fidelity because you have to check that the DMDT is aligned with the STRP and sending valid DXT to the two TDDF's when doing a cold start - but are perfectly happy with infantry that just stand there when you fire a pod full of rockets at them and tanks that can head shoot you at a mile with their Dooshka's Or how about the AI Mig-29's that can pull 17g's ? are they full fidelity ? It's almost like they don't care about the "combat" word that lives in the middle of digital combat simulator.

I'm a native English speaker and speech recognition software doesn't understand anything I say either. I do have a strong regional accent, but even making the effort to sound more " standard English " doesn't help much at all.

Heatblur are hardly going to listen to me, we'll just get what we are given. But not everyone finds 80's action movie dialog in the middle of BFM to be helpful, or funny. It would be nice to have the option available to turn it off, but still get useful feedback on airspeed. Heatblur themselves must have recognised this, or they wouldn't have included the Boring Jester option that hasn't been implemented. As I originally stated, if the F-4 has the same style of communication from the back seat then I won't buy it. I'm sure Heatblur will be gutted by my decision and have a rethink I don't have any issues with Petrovich, he does his job and that's all I want from him. Arm the weapons system, aim the missiles, report ground fire and that'll be just fine thanks. The interface works well, although I never ask him to fly, so I don't have experience of that side of things. I don't hate or like him - just the same as Jester is, he's a piece of equipment. I don't want my systems to have a personality. Although Marvin the paranoid android in the other seat might be quite funny

There's an elevation limit to the use of an RPG. If it's raised beyond a certain point the back blast will hit the ground close enough behind the shooter to kill him. The Somali militia that downed the Blackhawks were shooting from prepared ambush positions at the edge of pits they'd dug for the back blast to dissipate in. Mujahadeen ( spelling ? ) in the Soviet Afghan war are alleged to have built modified RPG tubes which directed the back blast upwards. Inshallah anyway. They did knock some helicopters down with RPG's though. My personal view is that until ED have done something about the omniscience and aimbot nature of their ground AI then they might want to hold off on giving them extra ways to engage airframes that are low and slow, but that's probably a crazy radical opinion.

Outstanding, you are a prince amongst men It's a bit of an epic task, but it should be do-able I suppose. Some nice RAF lines like " Tally Ho, what ! " and " I say, we are a tad deficient in the speed department old chap, there's nothing on the clock except the makers name " would be a good substitution or make him sound like Sean Bean and have every line of his just say " BASTARD " Really I'll see how much work it might be to replace his stupider remarks with silence. I think I'll pass on Jest-Her though. Unless she sounds like Maggie Thatcher

Much less annoying. I think it's the " Wheeee !! " sound he makes during dogfights that annoys me the most. There's me - trying to fly the shuddering heap of junk* into a position of advantage against one of DCS's AI UFO's - and he's sat in the back treating it like a theme park ride. You won't be bloody laughing in a minute mate, because we'll be falling out of the sky and you'll get to do a Goose against the canopy when you punch out. *I mean shuddering heap of junk affectionately