sc_neo

I'll give this a shot. Still the keybinding option for easy switching when having to interact a bunch of times in a row might sitll be useful. More power to the user :)

Do i need to say options in conjuctions with an airfield or awacs, or does simply saying the single word "options" with the PTT pressed bring up the general comms menu?

@VampireNZ This two weeks joke is extremly annoying! It's not funny anymore and people like you waste everyones time with these posts. Sorry for calling you out on this one...but you gotta start somewhere. This stuff appears practially on every second or third page on pretty much every thread. So please guys, if you feel like expressing your dismay about the development timeframes, be at least creative enough and come up with a new and funny way of doing so. This has nothing to do with defending anything about ED or whatnot, but reading this drives me mad!

@Hollywood I have a question or suggestion concerning the "Disable Menus" setting. You suggest in the manual to have seperate keybindings in VA for your PTTs and inside DCS for the various radios, so that when you press a Vaicom PTT on your Hotas for instance, the comms menus in DCS won't show up, not breaking immersion. Else, i can use the above mentioned "Disable Menus" setting, thus i can keep my VA PTT and ingame DCS radio comms keybidings the same (great for all modules that actually visually animate radio button presses). But then, i don't really have an easy way to look at those menus without unselecting "Disable Menus" in Vaicom which is a bit cumbersome. Could you add a freely configurable keybinding for "Disable Menus"? This way, we could bind this somewhere on our Hotas and easily switch between showing and hiding the menus when a mission has special F10 options.

It has been stated numerous times that new ED modules indirectly fund further development of the base sim. Besides the AG radar technology that is being developed for the F-16/18 projects, are there any other technologies that improve DCS overall that are directly tied to the F-16 development project?

Good to hear.....i panicked a bit too early i reckon. Sorry about that.

Thanks for the improvements! I noticed there was no addition of bookmarks like you started to do with the other revisions. I think those bookmarks really benefit your guides :)

No problem. I'll go on my goose chase when my system is back up and running :)

What i might do to nail this down once my new gpu arrives is make 1 or 2 additionalyl copies of DCS on my drive and revert those back to different patches from early 2018 when 2.5 was launched on stable branch, and maybe a version from late summer 2018 and somthing from january 2019 or so. This should show whether something changed over the last year that is akin to a memory leak. @Bignewy Do you have multiple iterations from various releases on you system? If so, could maybe make a short test whether there indeed is a noticeable memory increase between summer 2018 and now?

I wonder, the multicrew works good in the L-39. So the difference that seperates that aircraft and the Gazelle as well as Mi-8 and Huey is that the L-39 in fact has two distinct cockpits where the pilot cannot click on the exact same buttons as the instructor in the backseat, albeit some buttons share the same functionality?

Very nice first report in the stickied thread :) And how very german indeed...with clear and proper titles for each section! Those upcoming updates and enhancements are very much appreciated, thanks. BTW: what is current state of the multicrew feature? I have not flown the Gezalle in multicrew in over a year so i have no hirsthand uptodate experience. Last thing i remember i read here on the forums Sven said that this was not in good shape due to some DCS changes or so, but i might recall that incorrectly. Is the multicrew code based on EDs code for the L-39, or is it PCs own coding?

TU-22M3....that'll be the one for me!

Video looks great! Damn, AMD release the 5600 Gpu series already,...i want to get back into DCS :)

The Viggen is supposed to leave EA this year, so that means two more campaigns to be finished within the next 3 months :)

EDs carrier comes closest to fund game/environment tech directly with the enhanced ATC and deck crew animations and various things like working elevators and such. This could be the testbed to broaden those things for more lively environments like populated busy airfields, and in the case of ATC, this has been stated to be the first push towards a new and proper comms system. S So yeah, i will get it!

But we don't want ot guess anymore. I'd like to have one of the devs in the know technically layout how preload radious is affecting Vram and system memory. Actually, a bunch of indepth blogposts about Vulkan, AA and all that engine stuff would really go a long way. A lot of good weekends news posts that can be! Like..."hey folks, you want to get the sim you spent so much time on a bit better?"

@Redglyph I disagree on this one. There are often situations in Life where you really make strides with your next project. There can be various reasons why your skills and practices on a new project really start to take shape and it is laudable if you then go back to your older work and start applying some of it where it's feasible. PC has stated that the new tech that is being developed will be used to improve the Gazelle like, if i am not mistaken, almost a year by now. Which means the devs are aware that things can be improved and in its current form do not totally meet their own and our expectations. But, please go critize ED for not delivering the A-10C with the upcoming cockpit overhaul textures and 3d art. Go and tell Heatblur that the Viggen Should never have seen the light of day without pbs rendering. Why not? Cause experience and tech is a thing that develops over time. And the guys who decide to go back to older projects and see what can be improved with newer tech should be applauded, or at least be encouraged to follow through with that decision. Yeah, the judgement is still out and will come when they officially call the Gazelle done and finished bar bug fixes. And dude, PC have just openly stated that their judgement on what route to take has reached its limits and that in hindsight, a "both projects at equal footing policy" would have been better, what more do you expect? I don't know in what capacity the various people at PC have been working before, but according to their website this i their first project. Quite honestly, the Gazelle has been and still is a pretty good first show!

Aber zum Beispiel bie Github, da kannste ja anscheinend einen commit erst validieren wenn er von min. einem anderen Teammitglied verifiziert wurde. Und die linux distors sind ja eh fast immer Teamarbeit. Aber die Grundproblematik, das man wie bei praktisch allem in der Gesellschaft darauf vertraut, dass die Fachleute nette Bürger und fähig sind, bleibt natürlich bestehen. Aber, selbst Regierungen werden da ja teils wach. Der französische Staat hat ja im Jahr 2018 anscheinend seine kommunikation fast komplett auf die Technik vom Matrix-Protokoll umgestellt. Und die Industrie, was auch "immer sie verbricht" setzt ja nicht umsonst auf Linux. Es ist einfach ab einem gewissen Punkt absolut notwendig den code selbst einsehen zu können und auch selbst Hand anlegen zu können.

Um bei der Sache mit freier software zu bleiben bin ich bei Hind. Ich habe keine Ahnung wie was programmiert wird, und nehme mir höchste selten die Zeit, auch wirklich mal mit absolutem Laieninstinkt in eine Datei reinzuschauen. Ergo, ich vertraue darauf das A. die Entwickler keine Schweine sind, und B. sich das jemand anders anschaut. DCS allein; glaubt ihr wirklich, dass bei diesem Nichending jemand gründlich SRS, VAICOM, OvGME etc. durchgeschaut hat? Ich nicht und ich vertraue einfach darauf, das die Hobbyentwickler nett sind und die potentielle Zielgruppe viel zu klein ist, als das jemand hier zuschlägt. Das einzige was hier vielleicht ein audit hinter sich hat, ist Tacview.

Ich denke EA hat auch viel mit dem längeren Zeitfenster zu tun, wo der Entwickler den Vollpreis nehmen kann, weil der Großteil der Leute eben noch dem "Weg zum Zenit" des Moduls beiwohnen können. In der Spielebranche ist doch das Vollpreisfenster nur noch im EA und preorder Zeitraum, und, mit wenigen Außnahmen, 2 - 8 Wochen nach release lang. Oft gibts nach 2-3 Wochen bereits 15-30% Rabattaktionen, nach oft weniger als einem halben Jahr für 50% und weniger. Somit werden einfach Schritt für Schritt über wenjge Monate die verschiedenen Käuferschichten abgegrast. Zuerst die die heiß drauf sind und richtig löhnen können, dann die die eigentlich gleich wollten, aber nich 60-80€ in der Hand hatten, und im Anschluß die Kunden, die der Spaß eigentlich kaum hinterm Ofen vorholt. Deshalb ja auch dieser games as a service Wahn....da immer was neues am Produkt nachkommt, bleibt ein gewisser "Ist heißi und neu und noch geiler als zuvor" Charakter erhalten, und der Entwickler kann wesentlich länger den Preis höher halten. So in die Richtung denke ichs von der finaziellen Seite. Ging mir ja selber so bei der A-10C. Da war ich nicht bereit mehr als 20€ auszugeben weil es schon soewig am Markt war. Und dabei ist es sicher eines der Module mit dem besten Gegenwert.

Cheers! Great initiative, i am looking forward to your next sitrep.

Personally, i am less concerned with some bugs on certain modules. I am more interested in getting an update every now and then on where DCS is headed on a bigger scale. And that could and in my eyes should be done by the very people working on and implementing stuff. Even if this means that the less english proficient ones have theri blogpost be translated by someone on the team who can do it. For instance, Yoyo's wake turbulence stuff looks amazing. But it would have been more impactuful and probably be appreciated way more if he had written a proper blogpost showing off how he researched it, how it was implemented, what issues he was facing when connecting it to the sim, maybe a bit of background about the real world physics and how difficult it must be to translate that into code. And the icing would be if this is then connected to broader "sim and evnrionment" enhancements that ED is thinking about or already working on. Heatblur is not the uberdev., the Viggen is pushing close to being in EA for 3 years. But what they are really, really good at and why the community is full of praise and forgiveness, is their detailed and instructive blogposts about the various features leading up to product release. Especially that the various people on that team wrote those posts themselves as the experst on it. - Delineate a vision/roadmap for DCS as a sim/game where modules are just part of the picture. - Let every team working on a given area of DCS write a detailed blogpost themselves about what they have been working on and how it connects to the roadmap or vision of DCS 1 to 2 times a year. If there is like for instance 6-8 teams that should easily be 10-15 blogposts a year where the community can read about what has been achieved or is being worked on with first hand knowledge.

Still, a roadmap laying out a vision of where DCS will be going from here over the next 10 years or so would really be something! From what i have seen over the last six months or so, a couple of heavy wheights from back in the day are coming back to the flight sim market (FS 2020 and something from Micropose) and their new tech atm sure looks enticing. And at this point we have no real idea where DCS is going and whether the general world fidelity, graphically and simulationwise, will be able to compete.

Mein Problem mit dem kneeboard ist die umständliche Steuerung. Deshalb blende ich mir das pdf Handbuch im pdf-reader ein. Wenn man das per autohotscript macht, dann ist der Wechsel zwischen DCS Bedienung und scrollen im PDF nur einen Tastendruck entfernt, und umschschauen und Bedienen des Flugzeugs geht ja auch noch. Nur halt nicht in dem Moment wo man mit der Maus direkt im Handbuch scrollt oder was per Tastatur sucht. Ich hatte meine Methode etwas umständlich schon mal hier beschrieben: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=246756 Ich benutze hier Windows eigene "always on top" Funktion die ich per Tastendruck durch ein autohotkey script benutze, um das Handbuch-pdf über DCS borderless Bild einzubldenen. Maus und Keyboard und Joysticks etc. steuern weiterhin DCS/das Flugzeug, nur wenn ich mit der Maus über das PDF fahre und klicke wird das der aktive Fokus und Steuereingaben beziehen sich darauf. Ein Klick irgendwo ins Cockpit außerhalb des Pdfs und die Steuerung bezieht sich wieder auf DCS. Bin im Moment gar nicht sicher, ob Joystick/TrackIR-eingaben sich nicht sogar weiterhin auf DCS beziehen, während Maus und Tastatur das PDF ansteurn. Jedenfalls muß ich das script mal noch erweitern, sodass nur ein Tastendruck das PDF überblendet/ausblendet und Maus/Tastatureingaben sich automatisch aufs pdf oder das cockpit beziehen, je nachdem wo sich die Maus befindet. Also das ganze ohne die Notwendigkeit per Mausklick entweder erst das Pdf aktiv zu machen, und dann wieder einmal ins cockpit klicken zu müssen, um DCS aktiv zu machen.

Also das interessiert mich jetzt aber auch, als N1 im Verhältnis zu N2. Und sollen die 82% N1 sich jetzt direkt von den 98-100% von N2 ableiten? Hab mal die Frage im 467th discord gestellt, da wird schon einer der A-10C chefs ne Antwort haben.