sc_neo

if you are not even willing to part from 5 dollars for something like the ww2 asset pack it means that you put zero value on it! Why would you waste your time and energy on something you have zero appreciation off?

Thx for the detailed explanation. Again, i don't see anything happening or changing when i press 'space stabilize' via TMS left long. The seeker keeps floating in space like it normally does without any inputs. So i fail to see what TMS left long is supposed to do.

I was going close to 400kmh on the initial take off climb instead of advised 350. I try it again tonight.

Hey, i have two questions: i don't find any campaign documentation pdfs etc. in the ....\Mods\campaigns\L-39 Kursant folder like there is for EDs Red Flag campaigns for instance. Am i missing something or is all relevant info relayed via ingame mission briefings and voiceovers? Second, is it intended that when you break through mission flight parameters (speed, altitude etc.) that the mission instantly quits? That happend to me on the first mission. I think its neither immersive nor does it give you the opportunity to train a bit with whatever the task is. I feel it would be better if the trainer would simply state that you failed and that you should go back to the airfiled and land an shut down.

Speaking of the whole Maverick target aquisition thing; has there been a authoritative answer somewhere concerning 'ground stabilize' via TMS aft short and 'space stabilize' via TMS left long as described in the manual on page 88 (latest rev.)? So 'track' target via TMS forward short works, 'ground stabilize' via TMS aft short works also, but i am not sure whether TMS left long does anything! What is space stabilize actually supposed to be doing? The real issue i am confused about is; ground stabilization via TMS aft short is disengaged as soon as i start slewing the Maverick again. Is this how it works in RL? The TGP for instance stays ground stabilized no matter how i slew it around. I imagine to have read in one post of a RL A-10 pilot that this DCS A-10c behaviour is not correct and that the Maverick head stays ground stabilized even when you start slewing again.

I actually think ED is doing fine promotion wise! More probably means catering to a catch all audience which might eventually dilute the realism aspect of DCS.

actually for me, i just moved/deleted the fxo, metashaders and metashaders2 folders and the metashaders folder did not yet get recreated. Fxo and metashaders2 did. I started NTTR and Caucasus.

yep, fairly hard to do a proper start up during night-time on a pitch dark airfield. Enabling formation lights does the trick as a work around by casting light inside the cockpit.

So you guys doing this regularly; do you actually see a performance difference when doing this nowadays?

If your main concern is SSD space and you have enough gbs for NTTR or Persian Gulf but not for Caucasus, then simply move the Caucasus map files to an internal hdd and symbolic link that folder to you SSD DCS installation folder. There is even a nifty tool up on github. I have been doing this for my mods folder for arma 3 for years now without issues as long as that hdd driver letter and folder structure stays the same. But its only one click in that aforementioned sym-linker if you change something about its path. Here you go; https://github.com/amd989/Symlinker

So i have tried it on NTTR and looks really great. I guess it is being applied to all maps since the terrainoptions.lua ain't terrain specific, right? But, and thats just me with my old 2gb amd 7870, for me laggs too much since 2gb is barely enough to handle NTTR, Caucasus is really stretching it. Once i get a new gpu, i will come back and bask in that sharpend glory. Do you think ED might have an ear to implement both the fix and sharpening filter in vanilla DCS? The sharpening filter surely is bit more taxing on the system, maybe only depeding on gpu vram. ED could add a check box in the graphics settings so people with better gpus can enjoy that crsiper look!

yep, much appreciated! Btw, did you just increase the sharpening filter or something or play aroudn with the lod values?

looks very nice! Makes me wonder, you think this lua tweak would improve NTTR also?

Just getting back into SRS and i have serached the thread for 'voice activation' and the last mention of it was back in 2016. I'd think it would be a great addition! I get your concerns about hot micing an entire channel, but for buddies flying on a private server it would come in handy for sure. If it was implemented to be activated/deactivated under the server options i think it might meet the demands of all sides. Open and big servers simply disable it, and private small groups can enable it. What is your main concern? Technical feasebility/time investment or aforementioned 'hot mic' issue?

@Bad_Karma-701 No offense, but quoting such a long, pictured post is really irretating for all other readers. A whole lot of people need to to a whole lotta scrolling to get past it. I think it is more convinient if you simply refer to the pertaining post, there even is a post number in the top right corner of each post. That would be #1 in this case. Hope i don't sound rude, but i fell this quoting stuff has gone a bit overboard in a lot of fora. Cheers mate.

I am sure most people do not print but read DCS manuals on their pc, laptop or smartphone. Except for the latter, the standard vertical pdf page layout really isn't very practical at all anymore. Almost all monitors are 16:9 or even wider today, and that vertical format jsut doesn't make any sense. Smartphones and tablets are the exception because you can turn them easily enough. Juck's DCS guides already show how its done properly. Since the F/A-18 manual is not final at this point, i think it would be a good opportunity to either switch to a horizontal format or provide both.

''ground level granularity''....i just made this word combo up to hopefully best describe what i mean. I don't have the Persian Gulf map yet but from what i have seen in all the videos and trailers over the last couple of months, the ground level 'flatness' or 'ruggedness' is on par with NTTR; the new Caucasus and Normandy, i.e. the ground is a perfectly flat, textured tile that appears to have some ruggedness from a certain distance augmented when covered by grass and foliage. Now ED has increased the terrain mesh (don't recall by how much) for the Caucasus map which is especially apparent in the mountains, particularly the peaks. I am not entirely sure what 'mesh counts' actually means in terms of DCS or game eingines in general, probably exactly what it sounds like. If one imagines all textures, grass and objects removed, that mesh probably looks like an unevenly layed out fishinig net with varyingly spaced and sized meshes. While each mesh/loop can be at an angle to its surounding meshes/loops, it itself is perfectly flat. The bigger the average mesh size, the more flat the map feels i should reckon. So ED probably needed to develop some procedural tech that makes each mesh/loop appear rugged and uniquely uneven but still organically bound to its surroundings. Probably the same techniques (bumb and normal maps) used to make characters and objects look detailed and rugged without increasing the poly count. As i understand it, usually an artist makes a highly poly model and derives bumb and normal maps from it, bakes them so he can drastically cut back on the poly count without loosing detail.

Hrm, the DCS World User Manual seems not to contain such a list. Which manual are you referring to?

Hey guys, i have been searchign a bit but did not find anything yet. Is there a comprehensive weapons guide pdf or something that contains all missiles, bombs etc stats currently usable in DCS world sorted by faction and A/A and A/G? The encyclopdia does not really sort it well and is not accesseable during a mission.

@ouPhrontis So from your own experience, you would say that the self-centering springs in our Thrustmaster or CH Products mimic a behaviour that is not present in probably most aircraft? Hence, if the specific joystick had even resistance to not ouright fall over, removing the spring like Fragbum did would actually mimic a more reaslitc stick feel short of a FFB joystick? Second question; spring-loaded joysticks force you to do a whole lot of trimming all the time. But if real aircraft sticks are not self-centering, wouldn't that mean that you don't need to trim as often and strongly as we do in DCS because all those smaller adjustments are simply done by putting the stick a bit off-center?

@opps What does the target store function depend on? Is the last position you lock stored as long as one shuts off the TV monitor before the Shkval goes out of its gimbal limit or did you press some button or something? Or does it simply remember your last locked position and when you don't lock anything new and point your nose towards that last position, the Shkval jumps back to that last lock? So i tested it myself just now: as already shown by Opps in the video, you seem to need to lock something or lock on the ground when you have selected the Vikhr or KH-29, then switch to the gun and shut off the Shkval. On the next run when looking in the same direction make sure to be in gun mode before pressing O again an the Shkval should be on the same position you locked before. Then switch back to whatever missle you want to use. Its a funky way of doing it and i reckon its a bug and not by design. Would be great to have this funtion for real!

Den Warthog oder VKB und Virpil Produkte zusätzlich mit Öldruckdämpfern aus dem RC-Bereich auszustatten, ist schon länger ein Thema für mich. Aber ganz generell: glaubt ihr es wäre förderlich wenn fixed wing aircraft keine Stick-Zentrierung hätten? Trimmen müsste man dann doch weniger häufig bzw. erst wesentlich später um sich wieder mehr Spiel in alle Richtungen zu verschaffen. Also was wäre der Vorteil von besagter Autozentrierung bei echten Flugzeugen?

interessant! Die Schwergängigkeit ist ja die eine Sache, die Autozentrierung wie bei fast jeden handelsüblichen Joystick wie auch dem TM Warthog, ist die andere. Mir gehts vorallem um letzteres. Bswp. die A-10 als nicht fly-by-wire (gibts da mittlerweile Blocs mit fbw?) Flugzeug, wenn der Pilot hot und flugbereit aber stationär auf der Rampe steht und er den Stick bewegt, zentriert dieser sich von selbst wieder oder bleibt dieser wo auch immer der Pilot ihn parkt? Also mich interessierts hauptsächlich wegen der Entscheidung TM Warthog, Hauptfeder raus oder nicht. Entsprechende Dämpfung wäre dann natürlich schon nötig damit mir der Brocken nicht andauern umfällt sbald ich mal kurz die Hand wegnehme. Abgesehen von einem FFB stick, wäre halt die Frage was im allgemeinen über die bandbreite and Fliegern und Fluglagen realistischer ist. Zentrierungsfeder was heftiges Trimmen verlangt, oder ein stick der schwergängig ist aber in jeder Position verharren kann (wie das VKB dry clutch System).

Sagt mal, egal wie oft ich schon danach gesucht habe, ich finde einfach keine gute Aussage zum Thema 'wie gut ahmen unsre gefederten Joysticks das Gefühl in den üblichen DCS Mustern nach'! Bleiben wir mal bei fixed wing und lassen force sensing stick ala F-16 außen vor und unterscheiden natürlich zwischen fly-by-wire und klassisch. Wie ist das bei einer echten F-15, A-10, F/a-18 oder Su-25... Frage 1: Haben die nicht fly-by-wire Muster davon Flightsticks mit eingebauter Eigenzentrierung ähnliche dem Geüfhl der Feder in unseren Joysticks, oder bleiben die wo man sie parkt solange kein Flugwind auf die Kontrolflächen bei zunehmender Geschwindigkeit drückt? Frage 2: Und geben auch fly-by-wire Systeme den physischen Druck direkt an den Piloten weiter und schalten halt noch zusätzlich ihren input an die Kontrollflächen dazu, oder werden die eingaben des Piloten komplett digital aufgenommen und diesem muß künstlich haptisches Feedback geben werden?

@ouPhrontis '' On the ground we used to hold the stick back with the lap belt parts of the harness so the wind wouldn't take the ailerons or elevator and bang the thing around; no self-centering sticks for fixed wings I've flown, though once the surfaces get enough authority you've got that resistance/feedback that you'll lack.'' To what aircraft are you refering to? Thats a question i did not find a good answer to for the longest time. Do most non fly-by-wire fixed wing aircraft have a build-in centering force on their sticks or do they stay whereever you put them until control surface pressures push it around with increasing speeds?