sinelnic

The bastards. I feel like a schoolgirl who once more trusts the bad boy to become good for her. I freakin bought the damned thing thinking that they could not let such an awesome product fail miserably. Shame on you Logitech_Mark. I wish you to be screwed in every purchase you make, starting with chinese food. I hate you.

Nobody cares about Axis Reversal Bug. Here I am worrying about Axil Reversal Bug when the world might very well end tomorrow. There is no reason for an ordinary human being to worry about Axis Reversal Bug or any other of my questions whatsoever. :Flush: Sigh...

Hi guys, another question: Has the axis reversal bug been solved, for the Rotaries Throttle AND the Stick?

Oh yes, yes there is, called either SofTH, or Eyefinity. Or Windows XP!! :P

I perform a series of aerobatic maneuvers to try myself against the Ghost of Frederf the god of helicopter dance. Loop, no problem. Roll, flawless. I go low level, swing it one way and the other, and get so excited I decide to run to the end of the runway to make a hard turning stop and land gloriously on the numbers. Of course, Vortex Ring. But I sense it immediately, recover from it inches from the ground, cheering myself about how great an understanding of the helicopter I had developed, how incredibly powerful the feeling of being one with the machine, I think she acts, she acts I feel, God am I the grea... another vortex ring state. And it does not kill me, it just cuts my rotor so Frederf's dang Ghost can take a long laugh at me...

CPU, and specifically CPU clock, is the key bottleneck for DCS. Tri OC'ing your CPU or if you're gonna invest, go for a new i7/i5 with the aim to OC it to +4GHz. Your GPU is right now laughing very hard at DCS.

Just found that the Falklands were fought in a radius approximately similar to 400 Nm AFAIK (I'm no expert)... and they involved carriers, so we might get something nice in the DCS scenario! on the downside, the aircraft that fought that war were "a little" less sophisticated than what you can find in the DCS arsenal, so maybe an actual battle in DCS needs more space to allow for the extended range of the A/Cs and missiles involved. Also the argentinian carrier was grounded as soon as the "Belgrano" (Destroyer) was sunk, fearing it would be very vulnerable to surface attacks, suggesting aircraft are not very trusted to really defend the fleet in an all-out surface attack. On the other hand, the argentinian arsenal consisted of 4 Exocet missiles, so maybe our DCS scenario is a little different in that regard.

I would be really interested in real-life cases of combat helis brought down by RPGs or small-arms fire, I would assume that can happen either in a guerrilla scenario with no front-lines (i.e. an ambush near your FARP) or when using the heli incorrectly (i.e. hovering when and where you shouldn't).

Now that you mention it... is the DCS/Lock-on scenario big enough to allow any realistic naval combat involving carriers? or it would be like having the USS Enterprise in my bathtub?

I would send the Su's for static more strategic targets, even in a CAS scenario, such as artillery, bridges, FARPS, known SAM and AAA positions and command posts. I would leave the emergent/mobile threats to the Ka's, such as armored columns, sieged towns occupied by enemies, and act as "forward eyes" for emergent/unknown threats that may be better suited for a Su run such as a newly deployed SAM site. I would also have the Su's provide AA capabilities against enemy helicopters. Also I would send the Ka to positions closer to our front-lines, and only deeper if and when the Su's have cleared the path for them.

Not really, say no more.

And today CharlesB has confirmed officially that they're working on the 5.09 release of their software. Hopefully we will see some light. Besides that, why, on earth, is Logitech_Mark not saying anything? I find it incredible. It is as if this CharlesB got fed up because of the embarrassment his forums are subjecting him to, and started pushing things around to make something happen. Really lame. When all this is over I will write a case study on this. See, all this remains in the internets with direct links to Name and Last Name. This is a dynamic, real-time resume. If only for this, our friend Mark should react!

Hola Trujillostm! How did the panorama go?

Ok back home. So what you wanna do is go to "[bS Root directory]\Config\View\" and open the file "Server.lua" using Notepad++ (do not use Windows Notepad or Wordpad, they´ll make your hair fall down and won´t stop there) In Server.lua, go to line 43, there you´ll see: EyePoint[PlaneIndex.iKA_50] = {0.09, 0, 0} Change the 0.09 to 0 and your eyes will be directly over your neck. It will not help with girls but then again we´re simmers. Also if your objetive is to make a 360º "collage", make sure to be zoomed in enough to avoid the fisheye lens effect that appears when zoomed out more than a 1:1 scale. This is about having the HUD filling 3/4 of your screen, depending on screen size. Best of lucks, let me know if I wasn´t clear on anything.

There is a configuration in one of the files that defines the distance from the eyes to the head pivotal point. I used it. Unluckily I'm thousands of miles away from my PC, but I promise I will get back to you in a couple of days with your info.

Ah well I think the card will eat through DCS at any resolution. My concern is if Eyefinity eats up CPU resources than can reduce the DCS framerate. With Softh I end up with about 1/3 of the single screen fps. Too bad you have to work on a weekend, that's simulator-holy-time!!

Me neither... FSX sold extremely well for its market, and while it surely was a costly franchise, it had an enormous, unrivaled potential on MS's grander scheme of things. Think Google Earth, interactive. The fkn holodeck. I still fail to understand how they missed that.

Zangler, would you kindly tell us what performance looks like with Eyefinity versus single screen? Just starting a mission from Minerlanyevody in parking and comparing the initial FPS you get in both modes would be enough. Just trying to understand the performance difference between Eyefinity and Softh, looking forward to the 6 edition. Thanks!!!

Tell you what, go get ORBX extraordinary australian terrain (USA is coming soon, at least a tiny part of it), and then let's meet again for a coffe to discuss FSX's limitations. Oh yes their FMs are shiite, but then go get A2A marvelous "Cub" (yes, J-3), try some spins over the red desert around Ayers Rock and call me when you get to make a full loop. Once all this is done, go get your own personal F-18 to tour the world at Mach ~2, and if you're any bit as fanatical of this as I am, you'll love it. Note: I use three monitors, which enormously enhances the experience, your mileage may vary.

I will worry when the year of the cat comes.

What I experienced is that sometimes one of your main landing wheels keeps "bouncing" against the ground. Look like (I've no idea how to prove it) the collision detection for the ground gets broken, with the gear extending completely below the ground, and then contracting to max contraction, and, supposedly due to the effect of the suspension, bouncing back to full extension. This, in many cases, unbalances my chopper to the point of crashing sideways, and the only way to control this is to immediately bring the power to Idle. This does not stop the bouncing, but reduces its intensity enough to keep the helo on its feet. This will never ever happen on tarmac or rooftops, only on unprepared ground. Needless to say I have never in my life seen any sort of suspension+wheel act in this manner, but what do I know. But then again my personal theory is that the sim is not deeply modelling the effect of unprepared ground and some simplification was used to model the roughness as best as possible. There's an old joke here about a Physicist trying to develop a potion for racing horses to be invincible, yet failing miserably every time killing the poor animal, due to the physicist using a spherical, almost-zero-mass horse in his calculations. Heh.

Man if only you´d saved Chuck Norris´s life then we could already have DCS:A-10 in our hands TODAY

Now that we´re all emotional, I must say, at first I was tempted to remind about collidable trees... but then I reasoned: "IF- they know how susceptible we are with regards to expectations - AND - they still go for the tease - AND they are not soulless sadics THEN They must be really proud of what will be released as DCS:A-10 AND I´m happy to be teased.

StrongHarm is a Pro, always nice and refreshing to find one! Welcome! And btw, about the sticky, don´t hesitate in coming up with a candidate yourself! Once a certain guy EinsteinEP sustained a great discussion on the flight model with ED, along with other forumites and myself, and then went ahead and published a great article at SimHQ with all the info he gathered. This really is a community that values input!

Well whatever that is, if we remember that ED sold the US a *trainer* then we might possibly be surprised with some breakthrough in the *training* part of the sim, which I can only applaud and eagerly await...