DTWD

Oh for gods sake give it up man, your fighting a loosing battle, at least have the decency to go quitely. You don't have to leave the boards and go cry in the corner, but just accept your wrong and regain your honour. The long and short is: Your wrong on virtually all counts & The attitude you have used stinks

Sweet, I had envisaged the monitors in landscape. Do you find the bezels getting in the way?

1200x1900? Surely you mean 1920x1200? Anyway, can we have pics please?

Accipter, my only concern with the setup in this thread is the "fish eye" effect that's going on those side monitors. I don't know if other methods don't have it, or even what other methods exist, but it's rather noticable in the video. But if your playing the game do you notice?

You set up weather in the mission editor. ATC will also tell you about wind when you communicate with them for landing.

Now that is special!

Nah no need to go with the DP. Just get a HDMI to DVI converter, they about £3 :D EDIT: Ok that's 3 pounds, no idea why the forum has stopped recognising the code, but there we go.

Collective break that's it! Never noticed it doing anything personally.

My only guess on the Viks issue is where you are hitting the tanks. 1 shot isn't a kill, you usually require two. High up might have you hitting the weaker armour or maybe Newton is helping them along enough? There is a collective trim (can't remember it's name actually) but I have never got it to work where I could for definate say it was doing something. But I think it's only got a small bit of authority, if your moving the collective chances are it won't hold it as the pre-selected setting.

LOL strange this comes up just after I found one for the first time the other day. I barried it round that hill (in Ramstein's picture) at dawn (that sort of light that makes NVG useless but it's not bright enough to see very well through your hud) very low and very fast. I had never seen a dam in the game, or knew of there existence or knew that anything was in the middle of the river that was on my map, as I got closer I thought something was a bit odd. Then just at the last second I realised what it was, pulled back on the stick, put the throttle into over drive and hauled the heavily ladened shark (4 external fuel tanks pretty much full) into a an airworlf style power climb. I made it thanks to a bit of luck, flew to my destination and then crashed on landing...nice.

Sony as a TV manafacturer no longer makes it's own panels so I tend to stay away on principle. I have also seen several Sony TVs running that I thought looked utterly...well poo. I like Samsungs and would always suggest them, just make sure you drive them via DVI->HDMI not VGA. I have the Dell 2707 Ultrasharp, which is a fine monitor, but not as good as my 40" Samsung for playing BS...go figure! I agree with the TrackIR comment, if you have a big enough screen to be in your periphery then you don't "need" 2 other monitors. But you can tweak your TiR settings to only kick in after so much movement, so you can still use your other monitors if you want complete imersion. If you drive a car you will know what I mean. Imagine driving along with a box on your head blocking out what's going on in your side windows, now the only way you can view what's going on is by moving your head. Hardly natural, so "surround" viewing is just giving your prepheray vision back, but you still look around (TiR) like you do in real life.

1) You don't need 1000 watts, 750 should be more than an enough for that. It will also give you enough overhead for OCing. The biggest thing is go for a good brand, cheap 1000 watters realistically put out half that if your lucky. 2) Display ports just require an adapter to drive a none display port monitor. If I am not mistaken for 3 outputs you only require 1 active adapter and can get away with 2 passive adapters.

Ok here we go: 1) I am not sure if you have internet as me, but I have never seen anyone doing anything but singing the praises of ED for giving us a quality study sim. 2) If the BS has the wiring then that's one thing, but it's not like that in the virtual BS. You don't just decide "this thing is going to do AA" and it's a tick box in the compiler. Let's assume with the missles the logic, the rendering, the target aquisition, target tracking are all moduler and already written (and work), we now have to interface that with the BS. Not only that you now have to write all the code for how it works for the pilot, what does he need to do, how will the systems behave etc. NOW you have to make sure this all works next to the current code/systems. Basically what I am getting at is this: In RL it might have only required a wire fitting, but I doubt ED went to the trouble of programming systems that it never intended to activate. So it's not written, it needs doing, which is a lot of work. Something that's not going to happen on module thats "finished". I assume anything we see in BS now is a result of the advancement of the DCS. 3) Your attitude is a little petulant, you haven't got your own way so you seem to be a little mardy about it. 4) The BS is a ground attack helecopter, and let's face it, not an amazing one. Your comparing it to a modern (or at least modernised) attack helecopter (Apache). The BS will always come off the worse, unless something is seriosly wrong on the Apache. 5) Again the BS is a ground attack helecopter, or more precisly a flying tank, it should never enter the battlefield without proper back up, or with the knowledge it's going into theater in a role that will not see it come into contact with elements that can and will destroy it. So if your making your own missions pop in some air cover, that way they can neutralise the air threat before it ever gets near you.

Got to admit, I like the captions too.

You know they aren't new don't you?

I don't see anything in that picture to indicate the A10 fired the missle. Maybe a lucky participant in some friendly fire?

HD TVs (the majority over 37" now) are full HD. In other words 1920x1080, most monitors now a days are that resolution. Monitors may give faster response times or better angles for viewing, but I have played games (both PC and console) on a TV and never thought "oh this is bad", just the oposite on certain games. I have a 27" 1920x1200 monitor (a very good one) and BS looks far better on my 40" 1920x1080 TV. The problems arise in getting a TV that's good for games/PC, not all of them are.

Cool, I have the very same wheel and the CSP. I use mine exclusivly for the xbox though. As for the brake vibration, I remember reading that it can be controlled by the game, but until it's supported you can set it as a percentage (which is what I do for Forza). It's only a simple little thing, but correctly set up (even though it's effectivly fake) you can keep yourself from locking up, which is always handy.

Is that what I think it is? Am I looking at another Fanatec user? :D

The problem is they tend to have things behind the bezals, sometimes you might be able to save some space by removing the bezal, but chances are your not going to save much.

I would also be interested in this, although I suspect this: BS (I don't know about A10 yet as I haven't got it yet) is mainly CPU dependent and the GPU only becomes a bottlneck at high (above 1920x1200) resolutions. You don't mention what resolution these monitors run at (size is irrelavant on the performance side of things). So let's pretend your going to be running at 1920x(3*1080) = 6220800 pixels compared to 1*1920x1080 which is 2073600, as you can see your going to be pushing far more pixels, so it's going to be GPU bottlenecked, but you have a good GPU, so it *should* be fine. I would be interested in the outcome and the performance you find during real world playing.

I was/am thinking along something similar. Things I am thinking over: 1) How annoying will bezal thickness be? Should I get as narrow as possible (more expensive) or won't I notice? 2) 1080p TVs can be got cheaply, will they be sufficient. For example a 40" TV costs about the same as a 24" monitor.

But they could be used for stagered take off and landings surely?

It's the airbase AI I have the biggest gripe with. A lot of aircraft take an age to land/take off: An aircraft has to be clear of the runway before the next will land, they will not stack up and time there arival. Sometimes they can be on finals and break off at the last minute as an aircraft is still on the runway, adding yet more time for them to get back into position. They can crash into each other during taxi, sometimes causing massive explosions. Or they can just get stuck in a traffic jam and no one moves. If you put a group, of say 4 aircraft, set to take off from the runway they will take off in two groups of two, if you set the same group to take off from the ramp they will take off individually. When taking off the next aircraft will not join the runway until the previous aircraft has cleared the runway, meaning delay in getting large forces into the air. The aircraft do not prioritise based on the requirement to land, for instance if one aircraft is on fumes it will still circle while a less urgent aircraft lands. Some aircraft sometimes cut across the grass instead of using the taxi ways, sometimes this causes them to crash on the grass, sometimes crash into other aircraft on the taxi way, other times they get away with it, but it destroys the imersion. A fast mover tends to require far less runway than there heavy brothers, but they will not use any of the taxi ways on the runway other than the one at the end. This means that they use about 1/5 of the runway then trundle very slowly to the end the runway, delaying everything that's following it. Sometimes aircraft will land 2 at a time, a lot of the time this works, other times when they seperate for taxi they crash into each other on the runway, completely removing the runway from use. Some of the airbases have multiple runways, the AI won't use both for either landing or take off, they just stick to one.

The current game is not an RC, I saw it mentioned and asked the question. This is the release, obviosly there will probably be patches, but this is the "finished" product.