AesclepiusCrow

If this in regards to my post, I assure you I didn't mean any negativity by it. No harm meant, mate. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Note though that I didn't say get rid of, I said it minimizes the presence of the issue. Remember the OP asked about triple screen, not about removing bezels. Bezels may not be an issue for him. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Bezels can be minimized if you shop for monitors with smaller bezels or overlapping the bezels on really thin monitors. My bezels add up to approximately 1-1.5 centimeters with only slight overlap. I thought it'd be a bigger issue but with that much real estate, you quickly forget its there since your eyes are looking at a perceived point in the distance. You look past where the bezels are and stop noticing really quickly. In some aircraft, the bezels almost look appropriate as cockpit glass frames. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Well, they're really close to done, so I'd say no longer than two weeks tops. [emoji12] Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I saw this the other day and after finishing the roll the clouds disappeared entirely. I thought I just didn't see it correctly. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

So the likely break is at the button above the hot glue. Will check tonight. It still functions save for the one button so I have a hard time convincing myself to ground DCS to fix a button that's only really necessary for the A10. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Where would I look for the broken wire? I assume between top of stick and the board? Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Hi there. I've recently run into issues with my Warthog stick. The TMS left button no longer responds. As I've heard the customer support is lacking, is anyone here knowledgeable enough to know what may be causing it and a means to fix it? I'm still waiting for TMs response -- now going on three days. So if anyone has a quicker method like a blast of air or where to look for severed wires, I'd appreciate it. Crow. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

They may be referring to the website version. Sabre sold them on his website and I believe as they become DCS modules he is taking the old ones down. The current A-10 ones are on the DCS shop. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

One of Sabre's mission packs (that have been becoming official DCS campaigns) for the A10 has refueling covered. I don't recall which, but amongst other topics covered in the checks is refueling. Edit: It's the AATQ Campaign. It has both day and night AAR missions. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I for one am eagerly awaiting the day when we can all come back and angrily post about some feature being broken or overdue. Cause it'll mean we'll all be flying it. Just kidding. Fine job, team. Looking forward to spending some time in the danger zone. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I have seen something to this effect. It may simply be placebo, but I didn't seen to get the same frames I got in high until stepping them down to medium. I don't pay enough attention to change logs to know if fidelity increased for high, but I will say "high" seems a bit more sticky. That said, if you're comparing Georgia to NTTR the reason is likely the higher levels of geometry from a large scale city (especially if you're taking off from Nellis) vs the more clustered small towns of Georgia. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

That should be the one you need. The only other step you may have to do is input the serial keys, but that's quite easy too. They're store in your ED profile when you log into the website. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I believe the issue is due to the fact that DCS moved FC3 into module form sometime around 1.4. What this means is that you'll need to download FC3 from within DCS. There should be a button at the top of the screen that will take you to the module screen. If you logged in, FC3 should now be available as a part of the greater DCS install. Basically, all modules now download individually as add-ons from within the DCS program, including those that used to be separate such as Black Shark, A-10, and FC3. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Windows has a (or had) a font specifically designed for smaller font sizes. I believe for the telnet applications but I have seen it in the font lists before. It may still be widely available elsewhere as well. Wouldn't it be best to just find the font and then extract the closest fit using a font designing program? This would eliminate any additional design time as well. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Those are all really exciting to see. They give me hope that this is a great deal more realistic than I first imagined. I'd like to keep the throttle, but I just can't see me wanting to swap the wide range of options the Warthog offers for a kitbashed F16 throttle. It seems easier to just lock the Warthog and roll. I think instead I'll use the throttle pot as a trim wheel (as that's the least intrusive replacement) and build a somewhat complete set of A-10 switches and have a semicomplete A-10 pit. I think I might also find a way to add covers to it so I can instantly have switches labeled for a different aircraft. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Hi everyone, I finally picked up a Warthog and it's fab. But my old X45 now resides alone in the closet with little to do but dream of being more useful. I'm hoping to modify my X45 into something that resembles the Warthog throttle -- a working throttle with additional switches taken from the stick input in one convenient box. After seeing some of the really nice controller mods, I have a few basic questions: 1. Can the hats be modified into 4/8 independent switches? I assume hats are wired similar to an on/off/on but with four independent on directions and a central off position, is that correct? Or are they analogue? 2. Would it be more efficient to use the onboard Saitek board or switch to a one of the Bodnar boards? I am assuming the Saitek as it would allow it to still read and function as a Saitek device and would limit construction to just rewiring switches. 3. Does this have any unforseen consequences with DCS/Windows/etc as far as number of devices or controllers? I believe I recall most games cap at 1-2 inputs, but DCS reads all detected inputs. Is this correct? Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Sounds good. Thanks gents. I picked up the L39 and I'll be using that to acclimatize to Russian birds until they seal the leaky Hawk gas tanks. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I don't have a ton of time to spare for multiplayer, but I may well try that. I do follow the US pipeline, but I had hoped to enjoy whatever aircraft the Russians fly as a warm-up for the Migs and Sukhois. The reason I needed the Russian pipeline is the US/UK trainer (Hawk) currently has some crippling bugs in it -- such as the fuel consumption bug, making it relatively difficult to do anything with it at the moment. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Anyone? Beuller? Beuller? Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Hi everyone, I attempted to Google a Russian military pilot training pipeline, but seem only to be able to find one for US and UK branches of service. Those I have found for fast jet drivers seem pretty clear - turboprop -> fast jet trainer -> combat airframe. Would it be accurate to assume then for the Russian military it is effectively: 1. Light aircraft familiarization similar to the Texan II for USAF pilots followed by: 2. L-39 Albatross for combat tactics, weapons training, etc. then: 3. Final airframe such as Mig-29, Su-25T, etc? I ask because I like to put in hours on the trainers in order to get a better understanding of the mindset of the pilot, as well as unlearn any bad habits before changing combat airframes. If anyone has any info, I'd be appreciative. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

The logic on the Warthog isn't really difficult to grasp. It's an F-16 stick reused by the USAF for the A-10 which means it can do double duty. The two biggest modern military sims are arguably Falcon and DCS A-10. When the Warthog was designed and released, DCS World wasn't even mature yet. It wasn't so much a case of popular appeal as it was a case of capitalizing on an existing market in alignment with a major software release. For the Hornet, they're not gonna sell a stick for a jet that doesn't even have a hard release yet. Frankly, a Warthog quality F-16 style throttle with similar single/dual throttle switch and rotaries for fine radar control is all we really need, as it would at least fill general functionality -- but we've only just breached the first fully PFM fighter with the M2000, so patience will be our virtue. Given that the E:D and Star Citizen fans are picking up the Warthog for their pits (and apparently Saitek will be designing a Star Citizen licensed controller), there's little reason for TM to appeal to an as of yet non-existent market for other aircraft with a new stick and they're certainly not gonna roll out a 1:1 stick for every module. When the Hornet arrives, that may change but certainly not before. That said, it was pretty damn silly to have a press conference to announce absolutely bupkis. I, for one, am a little upset to hear that they are gunshy on swappable sticks for the Warthog as that seems to be the entire point of its construction. But if the VKB swappables sell well, we'll likely see at least one. My guess is it would be the F-15/F-18 considering we already have an F-15 throttle to match and both modules are on their way in the near future. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Based on what I'm seeing this is likely to be one of the pieces of kit featured -- prices Im seeing listed are $89 usd which is a VERY respectable price considering even the older TM and Saitek pedals still sell for $100+. If reviews prove this to be worth buying and price is accurate, this could be an amazing product. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Sabre, did the individual practice missions ever get added to the DLC download? Is there a status on when or how to attain them separately if they haven't? Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I'd hope they'd make it easy on themselves and simply just use total fuel weight. While I would love a complex KA-6D, I'd prefer to see it sometime before doomsday. The to do lists for everyone (see Silver Dragons post) are becoming so lengthy for DCS that I'm willing to sacrifice some levels of detail for medium to high levels of fidelity. Particularly for such a limited use aircraft as the KA-6D. I'd rather be flying a semi-complex model than waiting for a full fidelity sim that can have fidelity patched in over its lifetime. Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk