RvEYoda

Flaps being broken? Can't say. I didn't do dogfighting testing with flaps. Maybe one of the other testers did.

Game limitation, real AC has working nav systems in all modes, and you don't lose lock on target in the real AC either by switching to NAV mode.

What payload, gross weight and altitude.

Best way is to use an export script to produce turn rate logs. Then the only limiting factor is how precise you can fly. This is one of the methods used during beta testing. F-15 turn rates above M 0.7 should be VERY accurate for altitudes SL, 10k, 15k, 20k, 25k, matching the rates in the chart AS posted, within 5%. Flaps are broken atm.

Leavu/eri, just in their early stage here. We could make them even better :)

I will wait a while before releasing any new updates for leavu/eri. Need to make the installation easier and provide less options. Also going to introduce version numbers in the next release.

Both me and AS know a guy who does this all the time for fun :)

Just the Leavu zip. Don't forget to apply the compatibility for eri/leavu. I may make this automatic later That's right, no dll change.

Updated it again, much more efficient network code now for sim data. This second update is backwards compatible so you dont need to change it if you have no problems. It was meant to adress some problems that wireless users have reported. This doesnt affect dlink transmissions, which are already quite fast

Someone has to fly out there and find something on his radar. Then his actual radar data is shared on the network, so no more information than what is seen on the radars is shared on the datalink. The update rate of the datalink can never exceed that of the radar (usually is significantly less) When a contact is no longer tracked by anyone hooked up to the datalink, it stays on the last known position for a while (5-10 seconds) before it finally disappears. During this time(or earlier) you may chose to create a permanent mark point where he disappeared, which can then also be shared over the dlink at a later time.

I updated the software yesterday, so those who havent done it already it can be a good thing to do so now. - Fixed a bug where HSD showed TWS info even when radar was in RWS mode - The new version is not compatible with teh old over datalink use the same download links as always

Sounds like a driver issue since it says atioglxx.dll failed. DId you try turning off Catalyst AI? Tried a different driver, like 9.12?

This only limits the frequency the crash occurs, but yes the bug is fps related

Don't know if you saw, but target step has undergone some major changes from FC1: 1. First of all there is a 3-4 second delay in track file creation, meaning you must wait 3-4 seconds after a target has appeared on ingame display before you can step to it. 2. Secondly there is a 0.5-1s delay after pressing step button until it actually steps. 3. Third, when you step you might actually step somewhere/someone different than where you expected, it might even break your current tws bug.

Just to give an overview of what ERI does ------------------------------------------------ ERI radar -------VS--------- REAL 1. Elevation follows target: ....YES 2. Azimuth follows cursor: .....YES 3. Cursor follows target: .......YES 4. Long Range Boresight:...... YES 5. Target Step:................... YES 6. ECM ranging: ...................YES ----------------- 5. The target step changed in eri fc2 from fc1 lrm. It was noted that at least in some RL jets, the target step is somewhat unreliable since it may snap to many different sources of data such as datalinked contacts, track files, nav points etc. In fc2 this feature was givent a significant track file creation delay and stepping delay. A random factor was also introduced to simulate the idea of problematic/incorrect steps. 6. The ECM ranging in ERI currently has the following approximate error rates: at 80 nm the error is very large, about 60 nm at 60 nm the error large, about 40 nm at 40 nm the error becomes smaller, about 20 nm at 30 nm it is close to burnthrough, so error is very small To make the ECM ranging algorithms more realistic, primarily three things may be introduced: Starting error is very large, and cursor jump rate is significantly reduced to maybe 1 jump per 2-3 seconds Ranging improves if target flies aspects not mirroring the attacker Ranging improves the more times a target is scanned (for example values may be useless the first 10-20 seconds or so)

It is unfortunate that we do not have a built in mod control in the server browser, that would make things far easier. If it was theoretically possible to put this control into leavu or ERI themselves then that would also be good. However there is no good way of doing this with any lockon mod at the moment, except for the total server lockdown. I think there is not much point in debating which mod will make the most difference for your ingame scores. Leavu vs Huge monitor? For me it would prob be the monitor size increase, but it will differ from user to user.

I think ERI, Leavu, LOVP and touch buddy are very good tools. (Aren't 3sqn members some of the main contributors to touch buddy profiles?) Feel free to block anyone you like from your servers. If you think I'm taking this personally, then you need only look in your own back yard and the previous posts here for reasons. I find many of them personal and frankly offensive. I see no more reasons to make further posts in this thread, it can only get more off topic already. I suggest it is closed I guess I'm right on the only point i never even mentioned, at least, I don't understand what you mean

I honestly would if I had some

Depends very much on fuel Unsure if that is Fc1 or Fc2 Mig29 is considerably better in FC2 compared to fc1 from what I've seen

Then Grimes, sry but I can't understand your question. Might as well also throw in graphics mods in there. People saying so harmlessly that "oh it is just a graphics mod", well that mod that someone just made to terrain might just change it enough to make planes more visible against the ground, or the new prettier missile contrails might be visible further, or might make one plane behave as Kuz at far distance(unintentionally). For example I already know that some Su27 3d models completely mess up what low LOD models are loaded at long range. I experienced that myself. Why think that _I_ am the reason that this exists, when there are so many other mods doing similar things, I certainly wasn't the first - Maybe one of the first to reveal its possible weaknesses to the public. I don't get it. Do they get some get-out-of-3sqn-jail-free card? And then you believe it is MY problem to solve something that has been around who knows how long and you believe to be a problem? Sry but I don't buy this. I even made a "block-all-scripts" mod for FC 1.12 to help you guys. You are free to run whatever combination of mods that you want or not, and block them totally on your server, I have nothing tod with that, but don't come and claim I broke your game in some way or I was the first to do something you did not feel is right. Your oppinions aren't the same as mine

Player A has 50" monitor Player B has 15" monitor Are both players on equal ground? That is the entire purpose of making such a server browser Of course not. It is about where you draw the lines. For me that monitor has bigger gameplay impact than my mod, others may disagree. Player C has touch buddy with RWR Player D has force controlled joystick Player D has built a full workig cockpit. Player E has Crazy macine with 6 monitor setup and $10000 performance Player F has US rwr screen while flying Su-27 on LOVP Player G has automatic missile dodge script :) Player H has radar elevation through ERI radar <-- MUST BAN!!! What I'm really looking for is perspective

Yes, I already commented on that I think. My idea is to have a server browser that will help you set up the mods required to be allowed to play in a server. For example if your server bans leavu/etc, but allows some other mods, when people connect to it they will automatically download the mods they need after saying "yes, i want to install ...." Someone with extensive lua/luagui/dcs gui knowledge is required for this. Such requests have been asked of the developers but it is out of scope for their current projects afaik, so if it is to be done, we need to do it ourselves.

strange, i never had that, ill go in and stress test it now Update: I put targets out at all possible ranges and never had anything strange about it .. It always stayed at the last estimation point Yorz can you email me the track file of it? (In fc2 mp tracks are automatically recorded in the /Temp/ folder)

When you unlock the jammer the cursor and elevation will be positioned at the last target estimation point, which can be waaaay off. Yes this can be made better, I'll look into it, though im not quite sure what to do about it. I want the radar to be positioned to the last estimation point in a way. Sort of shows how inprecise the ranging really is :) If your target is 50-70 nm out, then this point could be anywhere from 20-30 nm out to 160 if you are really unlucky, hehe

It is not my intention in teaching you how realistic something is. For example constructive comments you could have made were: - Increase the update/cursor jump time step so it takes more time to get a range estimate - Let range estimates deteriorate depending on aspect - Let range estimates improve depending on time spent estimating.