Saltat_cum_mortem

+1 to that

Any time.

I kind of like the idea of the L-4. With DCS's game mechanics, having an L-4 pulling FAC duty on the Normandy map might be useful. I can't say how well it will sell. It is kind of a novelty--and a not intuitively sexy one at that. Information and licensing should be easy to come by at a low price. I suspect that if it gets picked up, it will be picked up by a company that wants something to put out quickly. Could be fun though.

Not necessary anymore. DCS 2.0 has just been updated with the patches at that link. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Don't consider me an authoritative source on the "finger gates" thing. I think I've seen them referred to as such, but I'm using the term here because it's descriptive. And the warthog does have idle/off switching at the low end of the axis. Ok, that's what I really wanted to know. Thanks for confirming that. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Something I like about the Warthog throttle is the integration of the finger gates. It's more than likely that I'm wrong, but my understanding is that they simply cut off access to certain portions of the axis. Again, this is speculation on my part because I don't own a set, but if this is true, that's fine for the top end and being able to control afterburner. On the other hand, it occurs to me that the gates would only restrict access to idle power on the low end. If it's not too much trouble for too little gain, my suggestion is this: I would like to see the finger gates implemented in such a way that they would be useable during startup and shutdown procedures. In other words, when at the very bottom of the axis the throttle is locked out of the running range of the engines and lifting the gates and pushing forward would bring the engine to the idle position. Conversely, lifting the gates and pulling the throttle behind the idle would result in engine shutdown. I feel the urge to give my disclaimer again. Not being an owner of a Thrust Master Warthog throttle, I've just provided a lot of speculation on its capabilities. If anyone can confirm or debunk my speculation that would be helpful.

I understand that this is, more or less, a rough draft of the throttle design, but it may have just made my short list for replacing the X-55 throttle I'm using now. :joystick:

And here we see the invasive species known as the Jagdtiger. [bABOOM!!!] And the Black Shark finds its mark again as if taking out sweet vengeance for a wrong committed decades before. :thumbup:

+1 I played Commanche 3. I've been hoping that ED would implement J-STARS because of my experience with that game.

I think this thread has gone a little off topic, but I don't mind indulging in answering to what it was and what it has become. My current setup is a Logitech 3D Pro, Saitek X55 throttle, and VKB rudder pedals. +1 to this. From what I can tell the throttle they're working on is going to be a single throttle setup. But since it is still in development, I guess I can't say with any certainty. I am however planning on buying the Gunfighter base and MCG in the near future, though. If I don't find that I like the throttle VKB are working on, I'll probably upgrade to the WH throttle.

I'm confused. Why would the attack mission require so much specialization? Most if not all of the ordnance being deployed today is guided. Also, if you're concerned about airframe specialization, then that has mostly been dealt with thus far. What hasn't been said is that the development of computers and the targeting pod have made airframe requirements mostly a nonissue for attackers. Theoretically, an excellent fighter pilot with an equally excellent fighter plane can take on an attack mission with relatively little training in comparison to, say, the 1940's. Even in the 40's, it was common for fighter pilots to take on attack missions when it was arguably more difficult to perform both types of missions. So why is it so necessary for either aircraft or pilots to be so specialized?

Which version of DCS were you using, and which aircraft we you flying? Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

It has the utility of a view controller not a monitor. If it was more useful for productivity tasks and web browsing I might compare it to a monitor but it's not so I don't. As far as accuracy to real equipment, see the end of the post you quoted. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I have TrackIR and the stock as designed would work fine. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

VR is great but expensive. I'm still flying TrackIR 4 because that's about the max I can justify. I'm not convinced that designing something to work better with a view controller that costs as much as an entire computer is the right thing to do. Furthermore, making the controller equivalent to what you see in game, seems to me, to be what you want when working VR anyway.

For affected individuals, there is a fix. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=184537

This is kind of what I was thinking. I'm not even really thinking about land mass. That, by my limited knowledge of scenery development, is mostly procedural. (Not scripting, but look at the data and make it happen.) The real trouble would be locating FOB's, villages, and cities and then putting the right buildings in the right places. I'm not saying that the data isn't there, but it is likely difficult to come by. A lot of data from the Vietnam conflict still requires FOIA requests to get a hold of, and some of it is still classified. Where detail is concerned, someone is definitely going to try building Air America/MACV-SOG missions and subsequently complain about a lack of detail. And of course, there are the people like me who would start carving up the map unrealistically in order to take advantage of interesting terrain. Two final points, 1.) I'm still not exactly happy that we aren't supposed to get DON airfields like Fallon, Yuma, and Miramar which fall either near or within the borders of the current NTTR map--but I digress. And 2.) in this particular case, the accuracy of the map can have an effect on enjoyment. This effect is probably more apparent during longer flights when you start looking out the canopy and wondering if that is the exact view someone else saw in real life on the way to combat. For these reasons, I would advocate for more detail instead of less.

Agreed. If you want a warthog, why buy anything else? Furthermore, I like the Russian designs for a few reasons. 1.) For a long time Russian style controls were pretty much non-existent, so the novelty of it kind of interests me. 2.) These controllers seem to have more control options. 3.) I know this isn't a copy of a MiG-29 stick but it's closer than most, and the MiG has had my interest for a long time. And 4). I already have the black box, so this will ease up my USB usage. So, yeah, when my tax returns finally get to me, this is going to take some of it. :thumbup:

Interesting, but I'm having a somewhat common bug that's apparently connected to there DRM software. They're working on a fix now. I'm just waiting for the update. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Glad to hear it. Now if only mine would do that. ;-) Here's​to the next update. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

One of the updates on F-14 progress showed deck crew and that they were animating them. I don't know if they plan to continue development of that feature or it got dropped but it's already been thought of. As for ground crew in general, the reason given for not implementing was that it would cause significant performance issues, especially for multiplayer. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I'm just trying to spread the word, but if you haven't already done so and are affected by the bug, please follow the directions at this link. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3086773&postcount=110 Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

My motherboard is gigabyte too. But how would that cause the bug? BIOS maybe? Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I have both of the redistributions installed. Visual studio is for developers. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

I take it you don't have visual c++ installed. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=48145 Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk