sobek

Ok, but tell you what, actually that makes no sense. Multi crew is not a small feature measured on the amount of development necessary to make it happen. What seems less risky to you: Putting it into a comparatively small and safe project where the only real development risk is multi crew, everything else you've got well covered because your engineers have a lot of experience by now. The project development cycle time is easier to judge and you can start to generate revenue based on that new feature relatively soon. Putting it into a large project with lots of other features that are at high risk of causing budget and time overruns, a long time span until the project will be able to generate revenue (that is potentially higher than the small project, but you'll also have burned a hole into your pocket funding all those new technologies). If you stop to think about it from the angle of project management, apart from just thinking about what you want right now, there really is no question about why ED did what they did.

The question is, how big of a market is there, really. DCS can only snowball if there's a huge unreached market potential.

Infinitesimally small, no. That would be an analytical solution. It uses a finite amount of sections, trust me. Besides, if you throw just any geometry into X-Plane, it will yield a very crude flight model, certainly not anywhere near the fidelity you see in some of the well done add ons for X-Plane and certainly not close to the level you see in some DCS modules. For that you still need a manually crafted flight model.

Every sim uses lookup tables, even DCS. X-Plane does too. It is still impossible to solve the Navier-Stokes equations in realtime. Therefore you need to have the solutions precomputed. It does however not suffice to have one table covering the full (alpha, beta) space. You need separate tables for separate sections of the fuselage and control surfaces and you also need to model some interdependency effects between parts of the fuselage. That is what separates the men from the boys. ;)

There's a booster coil that gets activated when the starter switch is pressed, regardless of the position of the magneto switch.

Clearly you forget how many vehicles are present in DCS. :)

Boom and zoom. It means entering the fight with a high energy advantage and trying to preserve the energy instead of entering into a knife fight.

That's not the only way. The best way to fix it would be to use separate heat textures to render the IR view. That means skinning everything twice, or even more often when seasons come into play. Suffice to say, there's a lot of work involved.

MW-50 is a mixture of methanol and water, it's not the type designation of the supercharger. The supercharger is on all the time, else you wouldn't be able to achieve boost pressure exceeding athmospheric pressure. MW-50 comes into play when using very high boost pressures. It cools the charge and keeps it from detonating. Essentially it allows you to run the engine at a great boost in power for limited amounts of time. Usually you would save that for dire situations during dog fights.

They are working on it but it's a big task.

Nope.

Yup, think of that female A-10 pilot that performed a landing in manual reversion.

The very existence of this thread is proof the problem. I'm sure the OP meant no harm, however the fact that women are singled out in gaming communities acts as a deterrent. If everytime i joined a TS and the timbre of my voice alone would suffice to make some of the people act completely different, that would certainly put me off. If you're not aware of the problem, you should browse some women gamer youtube channels (those who are active in MP games). It will make you lose faith in humanity.

Makes >15.000 posts on a flightsim forum, complains about nerds. :doh:;)

Yup, although Linux as a whole has made huge advances in usability, it still remains essentially an OS that only rather IT savvy people will appreciate.

Look at the date of the last article on Valves Linux blog. :(

Here in Austria, that "astronomical sum" will buy you 1.3 man years for a decent engineer or programmer (MSc in engineering and a few years job experience) including ancillary wage costs and equipment, less for someone who has lots of experience. So let's be extremely optimistic and say that it will buy you 5 man years in Russia. That won't even suffice for a simple trainer aircraft.

That's the new AWACS system, the disk don't spin, the plane does. Fewer moving parts -> so much win :P

Nice work, but i consider that pretty basic functionality and i'd like to see the ingame GUI take care of it instead triggering it throught external batches.

Fat chance. :(

It sounds like what you are missing is the influence of induced drag on continuous turn performance. You might want to check that out.

Well aware, but not everybody is a script kiddie.

I started out with a MSSFFB2 in the BS. For flying helos, it really is a gamechanger, because the stick always indicates where the in game stick is, so you know how you're trimmed and you can easily and quickly change from level flight to hover trim, etc. It's much more intuitive. I find it much less important for flying fixed wings.

Whoops, must have missed that. Please append then.