WelshZeCorgi

YES... F-18 & F-14... DROOL... *FOAMING AT MOUTH, CHOKING ON SPIT, FAINTING*

New buyers, I just voiced my opinion and know it's not a popular one. Edit: didn't think you were going to get so angry over that...

I'd be willing to shell out an extra $20-30-40 dollars so that ED could make a hifi F-15c and provide a free upgrade for those that have the old F-15C from FC3. That's just me though and as in previous posts, there is a demand for a lower fi, lower cost sim.

What? Feeling the forces of flight is very important when it comes to the differences between Real World and SIM and imperative to the fine controls of flying. Yes, pilots fly with their eyes but at 30,000 ft, your visual perception doesn't change that much from so high up and it is the forces placed upon your body that helps you determine when you are drifting or in an unwanted acceleration. I had an acquaintance that was really into Race car Sims and he had a full set up and everything. And the thing that I noticed was that I couldn't determine my speed or the rate of my acceleration just by "feel" I rarely look at my speedometer in rl but I know when I've hit the "sweet spot" of 40mph. In game, I was constantly looking at this SIM speedometer and found that I was always wrong and had trouble simply maintaining a single speed. (i.e. I couldn't maintain a speed of 100mph without drifting between 80-120 mph. Which meant that I always had to look at my speedometer before entering a turn which was a distracting thing to do every time I hit a curve.) Edit: Your eyes are really necessary for great sweeping maneuvers, great changes where there is so much force being put upon your body that it's overloading and no longer an accurate measurement of change, so you use your eyes, but in fine, small changes, small, visually unnoticeable changes, your body can sense them, but your eyes cannot, not until those changes add up and your perception changes great enough to pick up by sight.

+1 Same, would really like to take pictures from multiple angles for the DCS photography submission!

Is there a reason ED isn't working on this? I took a look at the "roadmap" for DCS releases and found nothing on upgrading the FC3 planes to full fidelity standards.

Really??? :huh: I have not heard about that... I could literally feel the money loosening in my wallet.

Just curiosity I guess. There are differences between the A and C. And I'd like to try the penny packet system... whatever you call that little pod on the right side of the A-10A cockpit. I also believe (don't quote me) that there is no PAC-1 on the A, which makes gun runs a little harder, due to the kickback recoil, also you don't have the TGP available.

I've always wondered why ED doesn't upgrade the SU-27, the F-15, the frogfoot and the A10-A to the "study sim standards" giving them clickable cockpits, high fidelity systems, etc... etc... etc... Why is that? I would totally buy a A-10A, F-15 and SU-27 and frogfoot if it had the same functionality as the Mig-21Bis and A-10C. (I didn't buy them because of that. And I don't plan to buy them until they do)

More or less every function system and tactic. Like, that mission where you were dropping bombs GBU-38s on bunkers from above cloud lvl on an overcast day, essentially giving you immunity from ground fire and SAM, while landing hits with uncanny precision, without ever seeing the target in your TGP during the attack run.

What are some Vietnam era music that work will with flying the Huey? Fortunate Son by Clearwater Revival, Break through to the other side by the doors is another good one. What are your suggestions?

Directly at the sun, right? That's how skywriting works?

Skywriting would be more convenient for me...

You want the most biological reason as to why it's technically harder to midair refuel in sims than in real life? A. You are not in a physical airplane. Meaning- Your body is very sensitive to acceleration. (You should be, otherwise you would be falling on the floor every few minutes.) And it is legitimately second nature for a human being to "correct" sudden or noticeable changes in velocity (again, otherwise you would be falling over every few minutes.) Which means that real world pilots can extend those senses to the A-10C they're flying, getting a physical FEELING of when and where their aircraft is accelerating/drifting, even when they are not looking out the cockpit, allowing a natural sixth sense that a person sitting still in his living room wouldn't have. When you pull up, even just a little bit, you feel yourself slightly heavier, sinking into your seat. When you push down, even just a little bit, you feel your stomach lift up into your throat. This translates to simply soother flying in real world vs. simulations and less difficulty flying in a straight line, i.e. not drifting upward, downward, side to side. B. Flat screens are displaying 3D objects on a 2D flat surface. A real A10C is not flat. The real world is not flat. But that $2000 1080p HD 60" LCD is. In sims, everything on screen is a 3D representation being presented to you (and thus your brain and eyes) in 2D. This really screws with your depth perception and makes it hard for you to naturally predict distances. Even when you're close to something. 3D gaming devices like the Oculus Rift astronomically helps with this however, because it emulates 3D vision. Addendum: Add to the fact that because you are playing a sim on a (relatively) small screen, everything is "smaller", A tanker is what, literally the size of a small ship? Yet on your screen at the same distance, that tanker would look like the size of a football, because it's scaled down to work on a computer screen. That also screws with gaining an accurate perspective. Something filling up your entire screen is not the same thing as filling up your entire vision. Again, Oculus Rift helps in this aspect and is a reason why "Curved LCD screens" are so much better than Flat LCD screens. A: Lastly, because of miscellaneous technical differences: Reality technically has an "input lag" as you are technically seeing something that happened one millionth of a second ago, due to the limits of the speed of light, due to the fact that it takes time for your eyes to process it, send the information via nerves to your brain, which then processes it then sends instructions to your body to react to what it's seeing. But add to that, input lag for your computer, any small lag stuttering that might distract you or confuse you on a biological/subconscious lvl, the fact that your Warthog Joystick isn't in an optimal place, (on a desk at chest level, rather than at hip level,) the fact that the real Warthog joystick is like, 3 feet long while the sim one is literally just the handle and a few inches before it reaches the baseplate, making fine control movements and adjustments more difficult to make. (You have to be even finer in your movements on the sim joystick than on the real joystick.) That's all I got. But technically, from a biological perspective, it's slightly harder on a screen than it is in real life. Hard in real life, harder still in a sim that leaves out a few crucial sensations critical to fine flying.

Thanks! Have some rep.

You know how on your TAD, when you get tasking data from JTAC, you have that red triangle flashing on the TAD where the target is supposed to be? Is there a way to make it SOI and slave all your sensors to the JTAC markpoint on the TAD?

ALLL OF THEM!!!

+1

I noticed a while ago that AI controlled drones were simulated in the game, but I had a sort of eureka moment a day back. What are people's opinion of possibly flying an unmanned drone? Can that actually be impossible? (Due to their classified nature) If it is, it actually makes me want to fly it more, wanting something you can't have, etc... But I'd like your guy's opinion. How interested would you be in flying an ED developed unmanned aerial vehicle? (One closely accurate to the real world equivalent?)

Die-hard study sim enthusiast. As the saying goes, "Give me the closest accurate representation to the real world equivalent, or give me death! (not really)" P.S. I get that almost 100% of the time, simulating such systems perfectly 100% is not possible. Voted: I only want a realistic in-depth modelling of IFF. Nothing less! But realistically, I want the most realistic modeling of IFF you can do. Nothing less!

I believe that this well made instructional video will answer all of these questions in detail. [ame] [/ame]

Well worth the money, just finished the CSAR mission and man was that a nail-biter... my god, I was practically screaming at the screen when the enemy AAA almost took down the rescue chopper seconds before I took the AAA out... But an A10C training mission set in the Nevada map? (this gif should be a accurate simulation to how I feel about that.)

You are correct. It would be great if Eagle Dynamics released a campaign that essentially was a simulated representation of what any air force pilot would go through to become qualified to flying the A-10C into combat. Frankly, it would be awesome if they released a training campaign for most of the released planes and helicopters. Including the P-51 and Dora... etc. etc. etc...

Really!? QUick!

Also, why hasn't Eagle Dynamics made their own Training Campaign? I would definitely pay $20+ for a campaign that effectively taught me to be competent in the A-10. Or any other plane for that matter.