ronht

I just received an update e-mail to expect delivery in May. Thank you Milan for all the hard work and your efforts to deliver a great product. May can't come soon enough!

Also from me - NO apologies necessary!!! Your video was very well done, I liked it. I just wanted to give everyone some information regarding what a real-life CAT III landing entails since I've done many of them in the real world. They work and for the most part are very safe, but are not as much "fun" as they appear when your butt in in the seat - lots going on with very little room for error. If anyone needs to apologize it's probably me for not being more clear about that. Thanks again for your post and video.

He said the answer would be "Monday" However, he didn't say "which" Monday................. :-)

Nice video, however, nothing about that was CAT III CAT III is for autoland approaches that require special aircraft and runway equipment and flight crew qualifications for approach and landings with a zero ceiling down to a forward visibility as low as 300 ft for certain runways. Most are still limited to 600 ft forward visibility. There is no minimum descent altitude for a full CAT III approach as it is a full auto-land done by the auto pilot. CAT II approaches require both a ceiling and a forward visibility as well as a decision height where the runway must be in sight prior to touchdown to assure the aircraft is within the parameters for a safe landing. These are also auto land approaches for the most part with forward visibility limits in the 1200 foot range. CAT I approaches are basically 200 foot ceiling and 1/2 mile visibility that can be flown manually or with the autopilot down to the decision height of 200 feet. There are variances to the above, depending on aircraft and runway equipment but for the most part those are the limitations of the various CAT approach categories.

YesI have the Warthog HOTAS the version 2 of the Wheelpro stand is drilled to accept the Watrhog. I personally wanted a bit more realistic feel so I ended up using 2 Wheelstand Pros which I like the feel of the cockpit placement much better

Looks like they just recently changed their web site, I don't see the "stick only" mount listed there now either. I would contact their customer service and ask about it - perhaps they missed getting that up on the site. I just got mine two weeks ago from them.

No there is no wobbling at all, it's all very solid and stable. The Wheel Stand Pro is fairly heavy so it stays where you put it. I don't even notice any movement when making quick and multiple rudder inputs. This is really a very high quality product in my opinion and I would highly recommend it to anyone looking for a more realistic feel and immersion.

I just got a Wheelstand Pro 2 and the rudder plate is not drilled for anything. Shouldn't be difficult at all to do however. I have MFG's on order and that's what I'm planning on doing.

Hi guys, i know there have been reviews on Wheel Stand Pro done here in the past but I just wanted to pass along my thoughts about this product and tell you about a new attachment they have for the Thrustmaster Warthog Flight Stick. I recently purchased two stands to make a quick very mobile and very realistic cockpit setup anywhere. The new Warthog Flight Stick attachment, really makes all the difference in realistic feel while removing all obstacles that are in the way of your legs as you sit in a chair with your feet positioned on rudder pedals. Here is my set-up As you can see, the new Warthog Flight Stick attachment, allows you to remove the base plate of the flight stick and attach it to a very small foot plate on the Wheel Pro Stand, which gives your legs free unobstructed movement for your rudder pedals. I am very pleased with this setup and would highly recommend it to anyone looking for a little more realism to add to your DCS experience. These stands are very high quality, very sturdy, and very easy to quickly set up out of the box. Wheel Stand Pro for Thrustmaster and the Warthog Flight Stick adapter can be found - Here Ron

Wheel Stand Pro - you can find Here or Here I highly recommend these products.

I think you are losing perspective that this is after all still a computer game that can be purchased today for much less money than we paid for arcade level flight simulations just a few years ago. This is also a business, that if it's to be successful, has to factor in what the majority of users want. At some point in the "realism" factor, you actually start running business off because the "fun and entertainment" factor becomes overwhelmed by complexity that the average "gamer" doesn't want to waste their time on. In this regard, I believe DCS in general has struck the perfect blend of "realism" versus "gaming" and a more than reasonable cost. There is a difference between suggesting and complaining especially to the business entity. If the complaints become the greater focus, the business will eventually go the way of all the great flight simulations of the past and we'll just be left with X-Box and PS -x wondering what ever happened to the great simulations of the past.

Ah..... that's the problem. The final approach speed for the Mig21 is 340 full flaps and 87% power. I'd recommend reading the Mig 21 manual located in the Doc folder of the Mig folder. Lots of good information there.

The point is this guys - The more appeal DCS has to a wider customer base, the more income they make to continue to improve, expand and support this great software far into the future. And with it's modular design you don't have to buy anything you don't want, it can be just what you want it to be for everyone. You only have to look back on Falcon and the Jane's series of good aircraft simulations that no longer exist to see what I'm talking about.

I am a real world commercial pilot, and I've been involved with flight sims since the original Falcon stick plane came out on the PC, I've gone through all of the available flight sims over the years and been involved with this product since Flanker was first released. What has transpired over the years in computer flight simulations is simply amazing, with the current leaders over the last many years being DCS on the military side and X-Plane on the civilian side. Sadly, most if not all of the great flight simulations - The Jane's series, Microsoft Flight Simulator and others have lost funding, gone out of production and disappeared with the popularity of the x-boxes that have taken over the home gaming industry. That said, in my opinion, DCS is far ahead of X-Plane in the replication of aircraft flight models and creating a realistic world in which to fly that doesn't require a super computer to get frame rates at a level where the flying actually feels like real flying. While DCS is an incredible military flight simulation, I believe it could also create a strong following with the civilian simulator pilot community who are interested in the same level of fidelity and complexity without the military combat theme. Ever since Microsoft Flight Simulator X stopped development, the civilian flight simulator options available, have done little to fill the void. I believe a great deal of interest in the civilian flight simulator community is still there as some third party developers still attempt to work with an aging and buggy FSX engine. One of the biggest problems with Microsoft Flight Simulator, in my opinion, is that it tried to do too much. Sure it was great to think you were flying out of any airport in the world, but the rendering and flight model fidelity suffered for it and quite honestly, few who used the simulation, needed all of that. MS attempted to do too much to soon with FSX considering the computing power available on home computers at the time and that is what, in my opinion, led to the continuous buggy software and loss of sales. I believe civilian add on modules to the DCS world with the excellence in graphics and aircraft flight model fidelity would bring a whole new following of flight simulator enthuses and customers to DCS, who while interested in the same level of complexity of simulated aircraft operation, have no desire in the military aspect that DCS is today. ED - if you're listening, it might be something to think about.

As I read about all of this, the concern over timelines, and the expectations we have all come to expect, I have to ask - Do any of you guys remember what it was like playing the "original" Falcon on a Mac toster? We thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, and we were basically shooting green stick figures on a screen because there was the tinniest feeling of flight involved. Kinda puts all this is perspective. Thanks to ED and the development team for continuing to do what once was never thought possible.

It all comes down to one simple point, in my opinion - WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? DCS is a fantastic product with wide appeal for everyone and everyone's mood of the day for that matter. There is nothing else on the market that comes close to providing what DCS provides and more importantly, with the evolution of console gaming, there are no products coming down the line that come anywhere close to offering the fidelity and immersion of even the DCS single-player stand-alone product. Go to Best Buy or any store that still sells computer software and compare what you see today to what used to be there. The fairly large selection of flight simulation games that used to line the shelves are no longer there, even Microsofts Flight Simulator, which many people thought would never go away, is no longer in production much less supported or being improved upon by the company. Not everyone has the time or the desire to learn every aspect of every military platform that may find it's way into DCS. However, and this is IMPORTANT, the ability of ED to continue to offer a wide variety at various levels of game-play and this communities support of every ED product, whether you personally like all of it or not, is the ONLY thing that is going to keep DCS from going the way of Falcon, the Janes combat series, Microsofts Flight Simulator and all the other flight simulations and games we've seen in the past. Nothing is forever in this business. I welcome every product and update ED provides for DCS and will continue to buy everyone of them in an effort to keep this fantastic simulation alive and supported by ED for as long as possible. Sometimes I think we get so accustomed to what we have, we forget about what we could lose.

FYI - There's an app for the PC, iPad and Android called SimPlates that has approach charts for over 70,000 airports around the world. Costs $25 bucks and allows you to download the plates you want so there wouldn't be any licensing issues to worry about

We all want information, but the problem is too many can't handle the information which is exactly why the information we all want the most isn't available. The online community forums have become our own worst enemies in this regard. I mean think about this for a min. When software companies have been forthcoming with information in the past, the on-line community immediately becomes critical of the information they get which in turn can and has ended up diminishing the return the software company can get from their product because of the severely negative connotations that become directly attached to the software product and the company that was only attempting to give their customers/followers the information they wanted in the first place. How many times have we heard the following complaints when information about a new product or addition is announced? * That's not the product I wanted them to do so I refuse to buy it * They should have chosen to do this variant instead of that one * It won't run on my 7 year old computer on high settings. * It's not detailed or complicated enough * It's too complicated for what I was looking for * It's going to cost too much I shouldn't have to pay for that when I already got this 6 year old software at a deep discount * We want it NOW, but if it comes out too early it's a buggy piece of crap and I've deleted off my hard drive * They said they'd release it this month and it's not yet out by the 5th, these guys are idiots I could go on and on, but I think you guys get the idea, we've all seen these kinds of posts in the past. The lack of information we now get is a direct result of our inability to handle the information we used to get in the past and the negative effect it had on the companies who were actually producing the software we all wanted which brings us right back to......... We will be getting the information and the product when it's done and ready to be released.

It's a shame there simply aren't any good force feedback joysticks out on the market on the level of the Thrustmaster Cougar/Warthog, especially considering the level of detail Thrustmaster went to in their design of the Warthog, around the DCS stand-alone release. I have a TM Warthog and a Logitech G940 force feedback joystick. When flying the KA50, I use the G940 joystick, with my Warthog throttle and my Simped rudder pedals. The difference in flying the KA-50 with a force-feedback joystick versus a TM Warthog or Cougar joystick is night and day. I's simply a different game all-together and in my opinion, one of the most enjoyable aspects of DCS flying that there is. Since there has been a bug with force-feed back in the last couple of DCS World releases, I've been using a work-around to get the force-feedback to work in the sim which you can find in the Input/Output section of the forums. But even with that inconvenience, you will never find a better more precise and immersive way to fly the KA-50 than with a force-feedback joystick that physically holds it's position after the trim button is released, where ever you release it.

No it doesn't work, it should, but it doesn't, that's what I've been trying to point out. The slightest rate of descent on a two wheel landing will result in an over exaggerated bounce in full realism in the sim

Here's where the computer simulation doesn't match reality with regard to wheel landings. If nothing else, start watching this video at the 7:40 mark through the wheel landing touchdown at the 8:30 mark. Notice that in the real aircraft, a fairly solid wheel landing touch-down, doesn't result in a bounce so high you lose sight of the airport, as happens in the simulation. That is the difference I was eluding to in my previous comments about wheel landings not being realistic in regard to the over-all feel in the simulation.

No problem Viper, I just wanted to be clear that the last thing I was trying to do was bash the work you guys have put into this. Yo-Yo really nailed what I was trying to say, you can have the best 3D modeling in the world, but transfering the "feel", which is subjective to the user based on background experience, to a 2D computer screen will never be perfect - although, I have to admit, you guys have come about as close as you can get :D Thanks again

I totally agree, thanks for all the great work you guys have put into this amazing product!

I almost forgot, I have 4 RC P-51's the biggest of which is a 50cc gas with an 86 inch wingspan - does that count? :D I love this aircraft!

Viper, First and foremost, I want to clarify that I am NOT bashing this simulation in anyway. I have been a long time supporter of this line since the original LockOn series and have looked forward to and purchased every release and will continue to do so. What you guys have accomplished and brought to the home computer screen with DCS is nothing short of amazing! My real life flying experience is based on over 27,000 hours of flight time in a vast number of aircraft many of them tail-draggers and heavy tail-draggers at that. While I have no personal experience in the P-51, it is an aircraft that I have been fascinated by for years and I have spent several years watching P-51's and talking with P-51 pilots, including the famous Bob Hover, several times over the years at the EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh Wisconsin, which I have attended every year for the last 15 - 18 years. My comments come from my watching P-51's landings for years, and talking with P-51 pilots regarding their landing and other techniques flying the airplane. Based on that experience, along with my real life flying background, is why I believe the bounce seems a bit over exagerated to me in the simulation. Having said that, I'm not saying that it's the "fault" of anything you guys are doing. Not at all, to me what this is probably most a factor of is not so much the computer 3D flight model you guys have designed, but rather how it translates to a 2 D computer screen and the resulting "feel" and the performance of the various computer platforms it is being operated on. I hope this clarifies my original comment and I thank you guys for all the work you have put into this incredible simulation.