Feuerfalke

Yes, it's been reported numerous of times. Seems to be a problem with Vista/Win7 and the sound-engine. Apparently there is no definite fix for it.

We will get the C-Version - no need for binoculars.

Funny game: "Eat Poop U Cat" The idea: several people sit around a table. Everybody has a piece of paper and writes a sentence or word on it, then gives it to his right neighbor. He has to draw what's written in the sentence and folds the paper, so when he gives it to the next person, that player can only see the picture, no the above sentence. Now this player has to write a sentence what he sees in the picture, folds the paper again, so the next player can only see the sentence, ... ... until the papers reach the player who wrote the original sentence. This is what happens in the online-variant: http://www.eatpoopucat.com/#completedStrips http://www.eatpoopucat.com/#stripDetail-10325

Ah, I thought it was the tactical optimists trick: Estimate a long awaited date as late as possible, so you can be positively surprised when the big day is there early ;) And in case you're right, well, you still have something to be happy about. :D

There will be a completely new driver and programming software package with the TM Warthog, that is apparently suited to program all modern TM-Equipment (at least the MFDs and new Sticks were mentioned). DCS: Warthog will be out in 2011? You have any links or are you using that crystal ball again?

I didn't notice it just yet. :smilewink: It's just a question of perspective. IMHO the problem with ArmA is, that it's from the infantry-man's point of view, while DCS is from the aviators point of view. ;) So instead of using a sound from a surface-launched missile for my rockets that I will hear all the time, I'd prefer to have SAMs use my rockets-sound, because I will rarely if ever be close enough to *hear* a MANPAD/SAM/TOW/MRLS firing at me ;) Doesn't change the fact that it's a good mod and a lot of work and dedication. :thumbup:

Yet another proof for your dedication to the DCS-Community! Nice package, thanks for sharing! Personally, I don't like most sounds in ArmA2, though the engine compensates for many things. For me, most sounds are too high pitched in OPF1, Arma1&2 and some just don't fit with my personal experience. E.g. the rotorsounds should have a much lower frequency in the cockpit and the engine/gears should be louder compared to the rotor-sound. The rocket-sound is that from a missile launched off the ground. It should fade off MUCH faster for an airborne fired rocket or fast A2G missile. But well, that's just my personal opinion. ;)

Great idea! If that's not what is intended, I sure hope TM and ED hear you. :D

Well, maybe I need to clarify first: This is not my personal opinion, but what people might think. So it's a lot more, what's in peoples mind, than what you think about it personally or how it is intended to be. This way the thin line is rather the turning point where more people might think this was a bad move. But this depends on a lot of variables, like what they know and what they want to know. So, if you play the hint-game I doubt anybody will be upset. But cock a snoop as somebody because you know what they want to know is just as bad as saying nothing at all, why everybody knows you're involved in what's going on behind the scenes. Just look at the 1C IL2FB-boards (a few pages back), if you want to see what happens if nobody says anything. Long story short: I surely don't envy you for your job :D And: Looking forward to see all the hints coming together to some solid information about what DCS: Warthog will bring.

It doesn't. The mentioned "slew control" causing confusion here, is most likely the mini-stick slewing the TDC. If by chance it had twisted stick for rudder it would say so.

I doubt anybody has problems with you having fun with hints. You should just remind 2 things: 1. Hints can also turn against you, if people draw their own conclusion and take them for granted, though they are completely wrong. 2. As always, there's a thin line between joyful teasing and being regarded as a sniffy b*tch. ;)

As posted before: Alt-Tab out of the game and back in.

Considering we saw a pair of TM MFDs in Wags report several weeks before they hit the market, I have no doubt that they share information and work together with their products. After all, the market for simulations is not THAT large - so any productive cooperation is in everybody's interest.

Setting it to 1024 or 512 depends a lot on your overall graphics settings and personal preference. Yes, 512 looks clumsier, but to be honest, I doubt the SHKVAL or ABRIS-monitor is using a high resolution display in reality, so what? You only notice the difference when you zoom in very much anyway. ;) @ StrongHarm: Kudos for checking out other threads and gathering information and details about the settings and also for testing which settings are best suited for your rig. IMHO there would be a lot less problem- and bug-reports, if everybody would take the initiative you did. :thumbup:

You mean DCS: BlackShark? Could be, but behind the cockpit you can see a T-shaped antenna, which at least I only saw on A-10Cs. I don't know if the C-Version is modeled in BlackShark, so options are limited - if my observations are right ;)

Well, it was posted that there will be news about DCS: Warthog in early 2010. Early 2010 is here, so hopefully the news will follow soon.

Good question. I waited for some pictures released during the CES, but apparently that won't happen unless they keep their new stick as the big bang on tomorrows final presentations. At least they coordinated a new add with the beginning of the CES, so there still might be some news ahead for us. Btw: You noticed that the A-10 in the banner is actually an A-10C? :)

I sure hope that TM hears you jocko417! Replace the flaps-indicator by additional switches or some rotaries to make it easier to build and more flexible for other simulations and you will earn loads of easy money.

Indeed. With GodMode and with all cheats enabled, as stated by the devs. ;)

Please also bear in mind that the 8800 and the 9800 use the same drivers, whereas the gtx250 uses features of the newer drivers - or did you really use one and the same driver for all cards? In other words: The performance increase is not necessarily based on more powerful hardware. Performance can also differ if you used the cards under different circumstances, as they scale with CPU and RAM quite a bit and have quite different effects under XP and Vista/Win7.

True, it's really stunning how especially ATI and nVidia manage to define new names for basically the same hardware. Both even added, raised or lowered type-numbers opposing established marks, just to confuse customers and sell older and hardware as new. In fact, when the late 8800GTS & GTX hit the market, it was noticed by hardware-magazines, that they were already equipped with the new chipset of the 9800. As nVidia noticed GTX was prefered over GTS, they simply changed the name and so the 8800GTS with the slightly upgraded chipset became the new 9800GTX. And indeed there were a lot of reports how MUCH faster the new card was - LOL. Funny sidenote: As the 9800-series also included PhysX, they locked this feature in the gfx-card BIOS, so it wasn't detected by games and drivers. Of course there were quickly workarounds available. ATI did the same, e.g. with the 9800pro's chipset, which was remarkable strong and found it's way on later graphics-cards as well, just with a new label - and a higher price, of course.:doh:

:laugh:

The only reports I read noted, that when enabling this switch on 64bit Vista/Win7 and rebooting, their windows crashed on startup. They either had a complete system integrity error and could not even successfully start up in safe mode unless they removed the entry via DOS or similar. Others reported a file access violation and a denied windows start, still being able to start in safe mode and revert the entry. Well, that's the reports I read so far. But please keep in mind, that generally people tend to complain when something goes wrong, but rarely come back and report something positive ;) - I think I will test it myself over the weekend.

Come on, TM! Give us some high resolution pictures or some videos from the CES! :crazy:

Inconclusive. The late 8800GTS (especially the 768MB oc-versions) are only marginally slower than the 9800GTX. Basically just the DX-compatibility was changed. Same is for the GTS250. Almost identical frequencies, almost identical chipsets, just new DX-features DCS simply doesn't profit from. It also depends a lot on your resolution and quality settings, as StrongHarm already is aware of. I fly with 1900x1200 8xAF and 8xFSAA and when going from my 8800gts 768 OC to the GTX285 my FPS doubled. @ StrongHarm: DCS is mostly demanding on your CPU, as previous posters already pointed out. As such, it is also vital to have enough fast RAM installed and of course AHCI enabled for fast access to your HDD. Also, please make sure that you run DCS in fullscreen mode. Windowed mode costs you a lot of FPS as well. You can also try to decrease "cockpit resolution"-setting. It does not change your textures, but the rendering resolution of your SHKVAL and ABRIS. To my experience 1024 every frame is overkill in 90% of my engagements (and probably unrealistic, as I doubt the screens have such a high resolution in RL).