Havner

:shocking: The P51 is the same! The license is not.

Read carefully. It has never been said that you will have to! The DCS P51 will work with DCS WW2. Just not the other way around. The P51 from $20-$40 will not work with DCS: World.

It means that P51 or Dora from $20-$40 pledges won't be flyable in DCS: World. Only in DCS WW2. If you want to have them everywhere you need DCS: World level pledges or buy them separately (the ones bought from DCS now do count). That's my understanding. regarding the future of what you buy where and for what. Obviously none of us can know that. But it seems that separate licensing is possible. EDIT: Look at this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114011

Licenses can be complicated. They already imply a fact that some licenses will only work in one base game, not in the another. So it is possible that at some point, some other aircrafts will be licensed to be used with only one base game. Doesn't really matter if you copy the directory or not. The base game will reject a module if the license is not proper for it. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the 3 free planes. But in future it might be somewhere.

Heh, the shots at 0:25 and 1:01 are used in the Kickstarter. They are showing a modern corsica terrain as an example of (supposedly) EDGE Normandy? I know it's not said explicitly anywhere but it's kinda implied.

And not only you'll have to wait a year for it but it will be only usable in DCS WWII, not in the whole DCS World :-/ Whatever that means now I wouldn't like to limit my options.

Yeah. I'm reading a thread "Business model behind this project" and still can't fully comprehend the idea. 3 planes for free. No real difference between $10 and $40 pledges (the stretch won't get reached it seems and P51/Dora don't really count as most interested people will have them anyway). Oh well. Still, I'll be happy to help them. But would probably pay more if all of the things mentioned above would have been constructed better.

Yeah, gathering our 2 quotes together you get to the conclusion presented by you in the first reply. But I still think it should've been made clearer on the Kickstarter page.

Ok, thanks for clarification. This makes some sense. But I didn't get it from anywhere that the P51 and Dora are included in the payable options as DCS WWII only. That was the cause of my confusion. It could've been made more clear somewhere. This is the only mention of a separate license I've found (in the updates page): But it doesn't say that those DCS WWII only are included in the payable options. Cheers.

I don't fully understand the idea behind pledge options. It's said that the 3 main aircrafts (P-47D, Spitfire Mk IX, Bf-109K) will be free. All payable aircrafts are in stretch options. There are $20, $30, $40 pledge options for payable aircrafts. What happens to them when only $100k will get reached? No payable aircrafts then. Will the mentioned pledge options get something more than the $10 pledge?

I prefere the new trimmer implementation as well (at least the idea), but for some reason it doesn't fully work for me as it should or there is something I don't understand. Scenario 1: Controls in neutral, heli on the ground. I start, pitch forward, get some speed, stabilize the flight (with joy pitched forward) and hit trimmer. Now as I understand the flight profile should be saved and joy should have no control up to the moment I put joy back to neutral position. In general it works this way with an exception that I get some pitch change in the moment I hit trimmer. It pitches up (or down) a little without even slightly change on RCTRL-Enter window. Scenario 2: From the above point I fly forward in stabilized flight, joy is in neutral position, heli is trimmed to fly forward. Without touching a joy i sequentially hit trimmer button. The same as above happens. Heli pitch goes up a little (which is visible without problem) but the RCTLR-Enter rhombus doesn't change it's position. By sequentially hitting trim button I can significantly change heli's pitch. All autopilot channels are turned on. EDIT: I assume that would be the answer: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=568723&postcount=16

DVD activated A-10 copy protection? :music_whistling: Thanks for the patch.

And it's bad when there are wrong decisions made about copy protection :) (no, I don't want to start any new discussion about that subject and flame around, sorry, just couldn't resist). I don't know russian very well, but I fluently read cyrylic (learned that at school years ago). And in most places I can get idea what's going on (polish, my native is slavic as well). The only drawback is that I have to keep my windows with russian code page (for starforce DVD reactivation window once a week). Besides there is language trick in russian version :)

That's the reason I never bought international version of BS since it was announced that it only can be activated via starforce online. I stick with Russian DVD.

Does for everyone :), check: Scripts/Aircrafts/Ka-50/Cockpit/x52pro_device.lua

That's exactly why you should turn them off. They're needed to active tracking, to be reflected in the metal tracker. TCP got his own which are passively detected, camera doesn't need to emit enything in that configuration. EDIT: forget the above sentence, I've read: "That's why I turned ON" No idea... :huh:

Ok, stupid question. You really sure you got TCP? The headphone thingie on the left side of your head with 3 red leds? Not the metal thingie you put on a cap? My TCP doesn't work properly on Vector settings. And knowing that tracking with vector is active and TCP passive (it has it's own leds) it would be logical that vector get's no data with TCP settings as you described. So from your description it looks like you really are using vector, not TCP. Sorry if mistaken though, just first thought.

To my understanding all of this also means that it does matter how we leave the collective after assigning altitude to hold. Let's say we almost perfectly left the collective on stable altitude before taking off brake lever. Now autopilot has +10% -10% each side to keep the radar altitude. But let's say we want to maintain 25m radar (low altitude in general) and we left collective on little descent before assigning altitude. Autopilot has +5% -15% which means it will easier descent then raise altitude when needed (it will faster lower altitude when terrain goes low then raise altitude when terrain goes up). In case of expected steep mountain in front of this situation is worse then leaving it little up (let's say +15%, -5%). Do I get it correct?

Thank you for clarifying but as long as it's a start (of some sort) it still falls under non fair competition. Deliberately forbidding or limiting (in this case) your comptetition. So we got to the point where saitek HOTAS is working but for CH HOTAS only the stick works, throttle does not. This is NOT understandable why NP makes request that concerns something they have NO legal rights to (non existant headtracking patent and APIs they didn't invent) I can't think of any other reason beside non fair competition from NP. They want their product to be the only fully functional not by free market rules but by deliberately killing support for their competition in such products as DCS. Unless I wont hear a better reason this qualifies to be reported to companies that guard free market rules.

There was, FreeTrack lost all the way. EDIT: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=33780 EDIT2: And BTW, as long as protecting their work is normal and to be expected as far as headtracking technology is not patented it can go as far as not allowing others to use their API. But forbiding to implement any other product is non fair competition. And links that Quarrion pasted here are fully understandable here. If I lived in US I'd make good use of them. I'm really surprised that ED accepted this NP ramp. How'd you feel if you could use joysticks only manufactured by Saitek and none made by CH? It's exactly the same situation. As long as none of these companies holds patent rights to joystick itself (not to mention that patents on such things are bad for free market).

But they can't support both. NP monopoly goes as far as linked above. They won't allow any other headtracking interface. They probably told ED: "we allow you to support TIR _only_ if you won't implement any other interface, and look at the market share, decide, muhahahaha". I own TIR, and after reading all this I sincerely regret I bought one (although I did that long time ago, when there was no such controversy)

Got another. When i landed on the solid heli didn't seem to slide. But the ship itself was not solid on the whole deck. F.e. the elevator area:

Check on what file it hangs. Maybe it can't read one of them and crashes at this point (broken file, permission?)

Have you modified Beacons.lua in normal notepad? I had crashes cause of this on start, notepad somehow corrupted this file.

I can confirm that. I'm not sure whether it's for all switches (may check later) but for some for sure keyboard shortcuts don't produce sound.