Sephyrius

Hope there will be some decent forested areas, having picked up Nevada way back when for collidable trees only to find there to be hardly any was kinda a letdown, much like how speedtree for Normandy would be huge whereas for SoH, well...

Oh no, the 31st is a Wednesday, it's too perfect to not be the date.

Has there been any word on whether we can expect the new FLIR representation at 2.5 launch?

Would be kinda weird if there was no campaign, since then they'd be charging more while cutting content at the same time. Gonna wait til there's word on a bundle rather than risk purchasing the hornet, carriers and/or strait all separately.

*prays for a wednesday tpod update*

Have you tried using the stopper on the left side of the nozzle lever? It allows you to pre-set the minimum position of the nozzles. Just grab it, move it where you want it, and drop it. So for STOL take-offs, set that stopper at 40-60' and you can yank the nozzle lever back without a worry after getting some ground speed. For VTOL landing, perhaps set it at 82' (you can set that up before even doing the approach) so that you can do the same for vertical flight mode (albeit you can't get reverse thrust until you unlock it again). That should alleviate any precision concerns, last thing you want to do when hovering is to fiddle with the nozzles too much.

Is the main server down? Worked fine 30 mins ago, now I'm getting no authorization/error 502 and can't even fly Harrier in singleplayer because of it... This is exactly why online DRM sucks.

Brilliant, I'll check it out and see how it goes. Thanks!

My R9 290X recently died on me, and I used it to push a 5x1 portrait eyefinity setup using a MST hub (albeit at a reduced resolution since, well, 5 monitors on one card is a bit nutso). As a replacement the AMD offerings seemed very scant, so I went for a Nvidia GTX1070 instead, and while I couldn't be happier with its performance it simply refuses to run more than 4 monitors at once, even when using the MST Hub (which would work around any hardware limitations) simply because Nvidia doesn't support it and the limit seems hardcoded into the software. So while 3 monitors is nice, I miss the peripheral vision, whereas if I go landscape mode I know that I'll miss the ~4k resolution fidelity. So, since I intend to use 4 monitors in portrait mode, is there any way to force the DCS camera point of origin to be off-center? So that the center of the view is always in the middle of a monitor rather than on the bezel. The x below being the monitor where the camera is centered. [ ][ ][x][ ] I could probably run the resolution of 5 monitors and have the game window extend over the side, but I'd really prefer not to waste 20% more GPU processing power when it has to work overtime as it is. Or, as a hail mary that would be absolutely amazing, maybe someone out there knows a way the Nvidia 4 monitor limit? tl;dr - Is there any way to force the DCS camera point of origin to be off-center?

By using nozzles 82 on your approach, what do you mean? Going from 0 directly to 82 and trying to glide all the way in using the momentum? I can remember having some of those 'falling like a rock' moments the first few days, but after making more use of the 50-60' nozzles first to bleed off speed and altitude and eeking out every ounce of flap benefit before going vertical it hasn't happened since. Not sure what caused it though, felt like running into hot gas ingestion when working the throttle too heavily causing a sharp drop that just snowballs (not unlike VRS).

Yet another reason why it'd be awesome to eventually get the Plus version - it has a MLWS.

Does kneeboard builder allow for the kneeboard to be outside of the game window itself?

:joystick: Disclaimer : Obviously not a priority at this stage of development, just asking for the sake of it. Will FFB be implemented, and what kind of forces can we expect? Since it's not a fly-by-wire aircraft like the Mirage I suppose that there's no reason for it not to be added, just hope it doesn't mean that RAZBAM is unfamiliar with its implementation. In particular I'm curious about: - Forces applied from asymmetric wing load as you drop ordnance (before trimming it out). - Since FFB rudder pedals don't seem to exist in the consumer market, perhaps the next best thing would be for the harrier rudder shaker (used for sideslip warning at low airspeeds) to be applied to the stick? Can't indicate left or right, but it's better than nothing. - Stick resistance being applied depending on wing load. Feels incredible when flying the BF-109, but maybe that's because its flight controls are mechanical instead of hydraulic? I'm a bit ignorant when it comes to when it should and when it shouldn't be applied.

Swedish Camouflage livery. Based on the Viggen colour scheme, fictional reasoning behind it is the aircraft that was developed inbetween the Viggen and the Gripen in the 1970s (Saab 38) eventually turning into / being jointly developed into what now is the Harrier. The V/STOL capability of the Harrier runs along the same line of thought that the Viggen and Gripen defense strategy employs, so it's a fairly sensible fictional choice. Swedish Gray livery. More appropriate for naval operations, based on the Gripen colour scheme as an attack aircraft to accompany it in modern-day operations. Swedish Desert Livery Kinda illogical basis, I just wanted a desert camo for use in Nevada. Thinking of using the curves of the Russian livery below and the colour-scheme to perhaps create a US Navy desert camo as seen here. Russian Airforce Livery. Basically experimented with converting the polygonal camo pattern into curved patterns, so it's not as good as it would be if done from scratch, but perhaps good enough to warrant developing further? Early work in progress, lots missing. Download links will be provided once I have some spare time to organize it all.

Wish it was possible to lock/link maps to specific campaigns so that that maps wouldn't create these kind of community splits depending on who owns what. It's no wonder why people would get quite annoyed if campaigns became map-exclusive. If that had been possible, the Strait of Hormuz map would've been awesome for the campaign. And personally I've been flying in Normandy far more than Nevada just because it feels more right.

Think of it like this - a gamepad thumbstick has 4 directions, but you can also depress/push the joystick down (L3/R3) in the manner of a button, which I think is the "action" button, whereas down is just one of the directions. That's the way I figure it works at least.

Is there any IFF indicator on the RWR yet? Been flying the "Oh damn, someone's locking me up let's evade, oh it was a friendly AI all along..." Viggen for too long.

And a quick colour palette change for the Nevada camo.

Agree, absolutely love it. My trusty old AMD 8320 is still powering through well in 2.2 (1.5 is another story...), and my newly acquired 1070 is pushing hard and still getting pretty good framerates even at near-4k res and many maxed out settings. It's absolutely gorgeous and smooth! Great work ED, can't wait for 2.5 so that everyone can submit to its buttery goodness!

More or less done now, thanks Ravens/Decoy for the nozzle and pylon templates. :thumbup:

No thanks. If you want to do it, do the following. Strip the existing module of all weapon systems, weapon mounts, disable the optics e.t.c. You basically sell it based on its flight model alone at a reduced price kinda as a "trial version" for those who don't want to dive in for the 50-70 euro non-refundable price tag (maybe it will even hit 80 with the hornet?...). Less effort, less cost, less time spent making civilian versions of aircraft we've already got, and still get the first step towards civilian aircraft via the transport and cargo role instead of just diving straight in. DCS shines in that it has some great flight models. 15 really good models beat 150 average ones any day of the week.

Almost done with the fictional Swedish camo skin, still got some textures that need to be aligned properly, a bunch of details, fiddle with being able to paint the nozzles and whatnot. Goddamn does Nevada and Normandy look good compared to 1.5, especially under other light conditions, and for me it even runs better (cheapskate CPU). Might do a quick and dirty colour swap for a desert camo version for Nevada since Normandy bores me a bit with its flat geography and repetition, gimmie 2.5 and/or the Baltic map please.

Uh, they have tooltips (at least in 2.2). Option 1 - Set TOT as the default 530D/Rockets/Gun firing mode (530D? Mirage code?) Option 2 - INS is always aligned. Option 3 - INS requires realignment on long flights.

I'm guessing you're looking for the "Target Undesignate" button on the stick, which sends it back to boresight use. Speaking of mavericks, having trouble getting a lock when it is slewed via the DMT+seeker, seems like it can't acquire any lock so I'm forced to switch to IRMV mode and slew the Mav ever so slightly, which is annoying if trying to pick out individual targets via the DMT.

Quite happy with the module so far, it satiates my rotorhead craving with its VTOL capabilities , has a good mix of an interesting flight model, complex enough to be useful yet simple enough that you're not managing a computer for the entire flight, and packs enough to at least stand a chance in air engagements. Not happy about the price tag though, wouldn't have bought it if it wasn't for the pre-sale (maybe that's what they were hoping?). I don't see Heatblur charging an extra $10 for the Viggen just because it's going to include a Baltic map (!), and now they're making a Draken AI plane for free as well.