Razi

Hello, before I make a new purchase, I'd like to understand whats happening. I'm looking at purchasing the new bundle on special right now. Here is the quote from the news letter: I've added the Special to my cart, but my checkout screen shows no difference in price even though there is a 20% bonus. Would I end up paying the $23.99 price if I complete the sale as it shows? The sale is for $23.99 and the news letter says that I can apply my bonus points to it, currently I have 20% worth, but the checkout price does not change. I've attached screenshots of the special sale price and the checkout screen as I see it. Just want to understand how this works. Thanks for the help.

Congrats Yob!

This is the thread your looking for: Link

This is a good point. Current DCS terrain is a pretty large limit to the enjoy-ability of this aircraft.

I'm interested! We need some sort of bomber in DCS - even if it has an F on it. Being a single seater, it would suit my more casual sim style. Many in the flight sim community enjoy this kind of flight, even without the pickle part (civilian aircraft).

If you don't mind, I'd love to be on the list! Thanks chobbs! I do not have this module (only have 3), but have been looking closely at it recently.

Thank you!

Sorry to revive an old thread. I would like to accomplish the same thing as the OP. Anyone ever get this to work? Editing the Viewporthandling.lua works well for the other aircraft, but not the Su25T. I'm mainly interested in gaining the 10-20 fps or so from disabling the Shkval

My Pro Clip has broken a few times. It is currently permanently fixed in-place with two-part epoxy and I've had to repair it a few times even still, but it works great and I still prefer it over the hat and reflectors - it just feels less intrusive to me than the hat.

The last thing is that modifiers aren't added when you first load a profile. You have to add the modifiers manually. Any mappings that use modifiers will show up red in the bindings screen until you add the modifier. This happens with any profile you load.

If your interested I also created a similar profile for the Su-25T for the Extreme 3D Pro. I tried to keep the general scheme of things the same so that it is easy to switch between the aircraft, but naturally there are some differences. I find that it works really well. I really only have to use the keyboard for the gear, Shkval or Mecury pod, the anti-radiation thingy (can't remember whats its called), salvo settings, and autopilot modes not found on the real HOTAS (i.e. route follow). I tried to map the unmodified buttons to the actual HOTAS buttons as I found on these forums, trim being the large exception, but I preferred to be consistent with the A-10C profile in this case. Changing something basic like trim makes it frustrating switching between aircraft, so I kept it the same as the A-10C. I made a diagram for myself so that I could remember the bindings, but I didn't label the modifier buttons. I think that it is still helpful. Su-25T Logitech Extreme 3D Profile.pdf Su-25T - Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.diff.lua

The profile file is out-dated due to DCS updates. The profile has to be remade for DCS 1.2.16, which works with 1.5 as well. The format changed from just a lua file to a diff.lua file and are incompatible without heavy edits. Depending on your skill level, it might be easier to remake it. I did just that and have attached my profile. I believe that most of the bindings should be the same. The only thing that I can recall that I changed was that I don't use button 12 for voice chat, but instead I added it as a modifier so that I can use buttons 3,4,5 for TrackIR zooming. DCS 10C - Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.diff.lua

I've tried the same approach, but have been unsuccessful. Are you currently able to have all viewports working correctly? (@moderators, I don't mean to be a bother. Sorry if this is a duplicate as well. I was posting in the first and oldest report about this issue, but it was labeled a duplicate. Other threads are about correcting MFCD exports, etc., not about scaled resolutions and overlapping viewports.)

Personally I'm not trying to export any MFCD's. The lua I posted works fine in 1.2, but broke in 1.5. The update did not change the results. It appears that If I manually enter a resolution, I get the distorted results identical to the OP's screenshot.

I get the exact same result as the OP with almost the same monitor configuration. Only difference is that my two smaller monitors are 1280 x 1024 and the center monitor is 1920 x 1200. 3Cameras - custom.lua

I don't see this CTD posted yet. DCS CTD's just after the opening sequence in the Su-25T mission "Long Day". Happens every time at the exact same spot, just after the camera enters the cockpit view (F1 view). I tested the same mission in 1.2 and it did not CTD. Logs and nfo are attached. Logs and nfo.zip

I'm able to consistently destroy a bunker with 2 KAB-500 in 1.2.16 in this mission. However, I'm having difficulty getting my wingman to use his 2 KAB-500's on the other bunker. If I command him to complete the mission and re-join, he RTBs. If I have a target in my Shkval, he says he cannot. Any ideas? I also learned the hard way that SA-11's can fire on their own, without the antenna...

No sorry, not the training "missions", but the practice missions for the Su-25T. Anyways, Scarecrow solved the issues for me.

Is this indicative of the mentioned policy change? The fact that the change will be to "high quality" EFM, not PFM like the other third party aircraft? Am I correct to believe that the UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, MiG-15bis, and F-86F would be designated as "high quality" EFM/ASM modules if they were released today, instead of PFM/ASM? This would make my previous post all wrong as I was making a distinction between EFM/ASM and PFM/ASM. Will this be reflected in the attached document here? This makes EFM ambiguous as the quality of EFM is not declared anywhere. As your post suggests, it can range from the Lockon Su-33 SFM to the UH-1H PFM (assuming this module would be an EFM in the document, if released today). All-in-all, System Modeling weighs in more than Flight Dynamics for my personal preferences when purchasing modules.

These are the comparable aircraft to the M-2000C from what I understand. *DCS: MiG-21bis = EFM/ASM Hawk T.1A for DCS World = EFM/ASM *DCS: C-101 Aviojet = EFM/ASM Based on this the M-2000C with be one of these with EFM/ASM dynamics and modeling. This means it would receive a "XXXX for DCS World" designation, as it currently has. When these aircraft's flight dynamics are of a high enough quality, they will switch from EFM/ASM to PFM/ASM and be in the same group as these third party aircraft: DCS: UH-1H Huey = PFM/ASM DCS: F-86F Sabre = PFM/ASM DCS: Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight = PFM/ASM DCS: MiG-15bis = PFM/ASM *In reality the MiG-21bis and C-101 Aviojet should be given a "XXXX for DCS World" designation, but they were released prior to a naming convention policy change. This is based on the document Wags attached here and what Wags said here and here

I learnt some things, see my next post down.

I just came across this bug today. I had just finished the training missions and decided to try the "Command Post" mission. As I was cruising at 4500m above the mountains I decided to start scanning for my target and, from wings level and trimmed, I engaged the "Autopilot - Level Flight" and to my shock the aircraft immediately entered a 30 degree dive into the mountains! Barometric Altitude Hold did the same thing. Would be nice to have it fixed in 1.5.

Thanks Scarecrow. If alt-hold is a bug, I can live with that for now. Just wanted to ensure I was understanding the autopilot correctly. As for the view, you double pasted the bug link. My previous searches came up empty, but I'm assuming there is some info about the changing views so I'll do another search in the meantime. EDIT I see that the link is correct now, thanks.

Anyone have any idea why the default cockpit view would be different from the Su-25T training missions and the single missions? The image with the wide FOV is from the training missions and the one with the narrow FOV is from the mission "Command Post". You'll also notice that the default vertical head angle is significantly higher in the narrow FOV. Also, as I was attempting the mission, I was flying at 4500m over the mountains and turned on "Autopilot - Level Flight" as I had done many times in the training missions, but this time the aircraft veered straight into 30 degree dive straight into the mountains. I then tried Barometric altitude hold and it did the same thing. So if I wanted to maintain my altitude I had no other option but to manually trim. Any reason the level flight and altitude hold settings would immediately dive and not hold my current altitude? I was trimmed and wings level, just wanted to hold the altitude as I searched for a ground target. Thanks

@Bucic I suspect we are at a dead end here as our experiences are different with DCS's vsync. In my experience DCS's vsync is inferior to nVidia's adaptive vsync - the comparison being done on the same system with my 60hz monitor - and this is entirely up to my own subjective perception. I have no empirical data for "stuttering"... I appreciate the comments and that you took time to reply. EDIT: It appears FRAFS will work with FRAPS to enable frame time analysis. It may be sometime, but I should be able to get some empirical data for microstutter analysis. Should help me realize whether my perceptions are accurate or not. I'm also very interested in a good comparison between DCS's vsync solutions versus nVidia's (on my system). Should be fun!