Zorrin

Best bet is to go to Lockonfiles.com and download the SU-33 template. It's a photoshop template that you can then paint. Once finished save the files as .bmps and pay attention to replacing the x in the file names with a number. This number corresponds to the skin slot that it's going to take. Then you can put the .bmps in the bazar\temptextures folder and you're good to go.

Are the cockpit positions correct for the other aircraft? Try reinstalling it as I have the exact same version installed and don't have that problem. Did you make any changes to any of the .lua files yourself? There seems to be some conflicts for people when they edit the .lua files. For example if I edit a .lua I end up with the problem you have in that movie.

In server.lua it's the "CockpitLocalPoint = {}" you can adjust. But I found I'd made a mistake somewhere and it happend on EVERY aircraft. CockpitLocalPoint[PlaneIndex.iSu_30] = {8.0, 1.5, 0.0} Is what works in Little-Dog's mod.

So you now want to compare the dawn of aviation with a complex helicopter? Sure plenty of people taught themselves, and plenty of these people ended up dead or injured. Hardly helps reinforce your point does it? Either way let's just agree to disagree before this goes round in circles as we're getting to the stage of splitting hairs. This is afterall the internet, and therefore I am entitled to be an opinionated a$$ and disagree with everything you say.

To upload it to LOF just follow the instructions here: http://www.lockonfiles.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=AddDownload#adddownload But you'll probably need to register there if you haven't already. Creating a ModMan compatible pack is easy too. If you load the latest version of ModMan Select FC2.0 and then just click the Mods Maker button and you can follow the instructions from there. If you can't, let me know and I'll happily create it for you.

With or without an instructor... I suspect the latter. I can to this day describe the feeling of sheer terror and excitement that surrounded my first solo flight. It's like the first time you had sex, only it lasts a lot longer and is a helluva lot better and scarier, even when you don't wrap it up. Your point is moot you had the safety net of someone who DID not want to die that day. Yes I am convinced, because I have seen it. I have seen a so-called simmer stroll into my flying school several years ago proclaiming to know how to do it. He couldn't start the engine. Plus you had the safety net of an instructor who like most of us has the desire to remain alive for as long as possible. Not quite... I fully understand that we are entirely talking about a hypothetical situation. What you're missing is that I don't think, that even theoretically, this is possible. And seriously would you take a 50% chance of survival? Of course I have more chance of being killed on the way to the airport. But we're looking at this objectively. Is it theoretically possible that someone could do this without killing themselves? Nope. A snowball in hell has more chance. Well if we're going to take our 'hardcore' simmer attitude into the real world, why on Earth would we not do this by the book? That's the whole point of DCS:BS right, we're doing it by the book. So unless you're saying let's play Real Life BS in 'Game Mode'... I think what you're asking is: is this possible? No it's not. You are never going to get this perfect situation where there's no tower and nothing else in the way. See this is the problem. We have to transpose this hypothetical situation into the real world. The question is simply if you can fly the thing in a sim can you fly it in the real world. No. Real world factors play too much of a role. Have you ever dealt with real world factors affecting the operation of an aircraft, as aircraft commander? Sure my experience is limited. I have flown a handful of SEPS, King Air 200 and Citation Mustangs and while I will say FS X had some help in getting me to understand the Garmin G1000 it in no way helped to fly the thing. It helped to manage the navigation system only. And even then, the real thing was a little different to the simulator version. We're talking about the consequences of using a piece of commercial software, that is designed to make money, and then transposing this to a real aircraft. Ultimately, let's face it, none of us outside of ED really know how much of the Shark is perfectly in tune with the real world counterpart - especially given the lack of production of this type. The answer is still no. Without that safety net of an instructor it would 99% of the time end in something horrible. Have you not seen the video of the chap who bought a Schweizer 300 and wanted to fly it before he'd had a lesson? Yeah you guessed it, helicopter was written off. Idiot survived but is prime candidate for a Darwin Award next time he tries something of this nature. You see the real problem with this entire hypothetical situation is: Real pilots will disagree, because we have been through training made the silly mistakes. Have had the fear that comes with total responsibility. Yes this is probably a very elitist statement, but that is something that a pure simmer cannot understand. Do you know what it's like to be legally responsible for the lives of three other people or even that of 300? The fact their longevity rests entirely upon the decisions you make in the next thirty seconds? For sure you can go out and be reckless on your own. But when you f**k up and know that the souls on board are your responsibility then perhaps you can actually see the viewpoint that is being presented. Flying has always, and will always, be about command decision. Physically controlling the craft is one thing - in fact it's the easy part of fixed wing flying. And I still stand by my laurels, just because you can hover a Kamov in DCS does not mean you can do it in real life, unless you have the relevant real life experience. I can hover helicopters, I can fly them happily. I am not however licensed. I have never flown a helicopter solo. I can happily throw the Kamov around like there's no tomorrow. But I would not feel confident enough in my abilities to take one up and survive the experience. There are just too many variables. And this brings us back to what flying really is. Command decision. Simulators do not teach you command decision. Experience teaches you command decision, and it is command decision that gets you home alive.

What's the effect of using a four-engined airframe with a cockpit that caters for two? Can you only have them starting in the air or something?

QTips? :P

So little-Dog, looked at your Harrier shots... You can actually use it in a VTOL capability? Was this achieved with flaps? Damn you now I'm going to have to play around with this even more...

I tried the E-2C Hawkeye and F/A-18A yesterday. Obviously the cockpits were well out of position but I also found that none of the controls worked. However it also affected my Su-33 so I guess that was an error in the coding on my part.

I'm sorry but what you're saying there cannot happen. Simulators as a hobby teach overconfidence. Because when we do something stupid or something that was just plain wrong we can restart it. How many people actually perform all of the tests as part of the KA-50's start-up procedure? Actually pay attention to the temperatures and what not during the start-up. I know I don't, because I know it ain't ever going to spike or cause me a problem. Although you mention the humility of a beginner student pilot, this would be theoretical only. No body in their right mind would actually do that - unless they had been developing overconfidence from a "high" fidelity simulator. Now I'm not saying that DCS is shoddy in terms of realism, it's not. However it is still a long way from reality. But surely the biggest issue of whether or not someone could fly the Kamov after having learnt it in DCS is the airmanship side of things. How would someone interact with the tower, do you even know where the PTT is in the Shark? What do you do if there's another aircraft or helicopter coming at you. What if another Kamov is ground taxying past you, what are you going to do about the effects of it's rotor wash? There are far too many variables that you cannot learn from DCS. You can learn procedures and as JimMack said switchology. Perhaps I'm spoilt because I have a license, call me elitist or whatever, but without proper training you will not be able to fly anything safely, with good airmanship and within limits. So bearing in mind your knowledge that it requires respect, education, concentration and humility you still believe that someone with no actual experience can fly something straight off the bat? Flying is not about physically controlling the thing. It is about command decision. Doesn't instil that feeling of fear when you know you are lost, it's dark and you're running low on fuel. :helpsmilie: Flight training teaches you not to make the big mistakes that will kill you. You always make mistakes because of human nature, the training weeds out the big ones and lets you make little ones that you can survive.

Did you try editing the view.cfg and/or the graphics.cfg to set it manually?

I ran a flying school (both helis and planes) and helicopter charter company a few years back in the UK. Had a spotty 17 year old lad stroll in to enquire about a PPL(A). Told him the requirements and he scoffed at my suggestion that it would be anywhere between 10 and 15 hours before he went solo. He said he'd had a lot of Flight Simulator experience and believed he could quite easily take "one of those little planes" (a Cessna 152) take off fly a circuit and land. He couldn't even start the engine. I am still relatively wet behind the ears in flying with around 160-hours and oodles of 'sim time'. But I'd be sceptical of my ability to bring a Kamov back in one piece, regardless of how I can throw it around in DCS. As a procedural trainer and cockpit familiarity yes, but to suggest anything else is just not sensible. Even if we accept the fact that there people out there who are naturally gifted in the ability to use aircraft. Flying is not really about physically controlling the aircraft, it's the command decision that is entrusted to you as an aircraft commander. The fact that you are solely responsible for the lives of every single person on board your aircraft. Yup 'coz the walkround is really easy to practise in FS and you know what to look for too. It'd probably be hard enough just to get the engines started without breaking anything!

I was playing around and trying to create a nice mission in the FC2.0 editor and put in a basic 7m/s (25km/h) headwind with my carrier battle group doing maximum speed. The ships showed speed of 27 but I think mine is still in Imperial Units so that's about 50km/h. Now on the HUD of the SU33 I'd expect to see the airspeed at 70 or 80km/h in line with the wind and combined speed of the carrier battle group but I'm seeing 20. Wind at ground level was 260 with the arrow quite clearly showing that it would be a headwind with 7/ms and the carrier battle-group was heading more or less due East so it was into wind.

A dude in a lab coat playing with an engine while wondering what his darling wife is going to cook for dinner. But if you look carefully his lab coat is a bit tight so you can tell he's got a happy life and isn't stressed out from a divorce or unruly children. At a guess I'd say he had a girl called Svetlana who's an angel, aged 9, inherited her mother's looks and is the starlet of the family overachieving. Oh and he drives a Lada. Am I right? :D

Just have to fly lower then!

I doubt you're gonna see anything as advanced as that in an "LO addon". If they can be used in the real thing then that'll be something that we can expect in DCS:Hog and moreover it'd probably detract from ED's business plan. Yah we can complain, but like us, they gotta eat. Patience is a virtue eh?

You could fly the F15 without wings in 1.02 as well. If you taxi past hangars at high speed you can tear the wings off and then take off and fly around as if nothing was wrong. Well you gotta do it much much faster...

First blast with FC2.0.

Did you try putting them in a folder that ISN'T on your desktop. You said you'd downloaded the files there, try putting them in your documents folder or something and just name?

Would it not be possible to get a half mil flat laminated version? A non-laminated chart would be silly and easy to wear out. While you're at it you might as well get the ED/TFC/DCS branded protractors, chino graph pencils, permanent markers and 'whizz wheels'. If laminated charts are the ones produced then anyone using it may want this useful tidbit: Use a permanent marker to draw your lines and then you can remove any lines with some aftershave/cologne and a tissue. Or use your wife's perfume, whatever is cheaper. Deodorant sprays work well too. Nail varnish remover works most of the time but doesn't smell as good.

Given that the Ka-50 has a radar altimeter it makes sense to keep the barometric altimeter on the QNH - altitude above mean sea level. The radar altimeter has a large enough range that you don't need to worry about the difference between QFE and QNH. The radalt will be more accurate than a QFE anyway, because in reality the pressure changes all over the place. Obviously this isn't modelled in BS yet but let's hope that a real weather environment will come with the Hog.

9th Company - kinda like the Russian Full Metal Jacket. Follows a bunch of raw recruits from Russia to training to fighting the Mujadeen. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0417397/ for the trailer (but no subtitles): http://www.9thcompany.com/

Would you really spend $200? C'mon.

Have a look at the copyright, generally you can reproduce them in such a fashion as long as you are crediting the original to them. Blah blah blah.