ronht

No not exactly. Flight levels are not random altitudes, they are explicitly laid out generally at 1000 ft or 300 meter intervals based on the direction of flight. Aircraft that are flying at altitudes that do not correspond to one of the organized flight levels report their exact altitude and do not use "flight level" when announcing it.

Actually - they're not. What's the same is that all assignable altitudes (based on direction) above the Transition Altitude are referred to as flight levels, however, they may be aligned differently. For instance the flight levels in China are aligned differently than the flight levels in Russia, even though they are both referenced in meters. As an example, an aircraft on a westerly route in China @ 10100 meters, (which is a valid flight level in China) would have to climb to 10600 meters when transitioning into Russian airspace, or descend to 9600 meters because those are the closest "assignable" valid flight levels for the direction, that Russia has in their airspace.

I cannot stress enough about how important support for companies like ED is for bringing us these incredable simulations. Without our support, they will go by the wayside like so many other great simulations of the past. Remember the Janes series? Let's not let that happen to DCS. There is just too much potential here to not give our strong support to.

Flight Level 90 is 9,000 ft, Flight Level 100 is 10,000 ft and so on in Europe. In the US Flight Level 230 is 23,000ft and Flight Level 420 is 42000 ft and so on. In countries that use meters they say the entire number for the altitude ie. "Climb to Ten Thousand, Six Hundred meters" and generally they don't use the term "Flight Level" when speaking altitudes in meters.

Hey guys, I fly for a living and have experience flying in several countries around the world. Much of what has been stated here is accurate while some of it is a little off. The transition level in the US has more to do with controlled airspace (above 18,000ft) and uncontrolled airspace (below 18,000 ft outside of any airport control zones or terminal control areas) In other countries this is not the case as the transition level can change from region to region or airport to airport and in many cases the transition level can vary based on the altimeter setting even though the airspace below transition level is also controlled airspace. Russia is the only country that I know of currently using QFE settings below transition level. It's also important to understand that QFE settings can be different for different runways on the airport. As an example, Moscow's Domodedovo airport with parallel runways provides different QFE altimeter settings for each runway because the touchdown zone elevation differs between runways. Foreign carriers who don't operate on QFE use QNH altimeter settings and a conversion chart to descend to the appropriate altitudes. Most countries outside the US issue altimeter settings in hecto pascals and QNH inches or will provide QNH in inches on request. The US operates strictly on QNH inches but can provide hecto pascals on request. Most countries assign altitudes in Feet while China, Mongolia, Korea and Russia and a few others use meters, although their flight levels may be aligned differently ie. you can fly 10400 meters in China but would have to transition to 10600 meters when transitioning into Russian airspace. I know we're getting a bit off track here for what's used in the simulator, but I just wanted to mention a few of those things from my experience.

Good expaination Exangelus and BlueRidgeDx is correct regarding the seperation, it's basicly 1000ft unless you're in a non- RVSM environment then it's still 2000ft. Russia is the only country that I'm aware of currently using QFE as a standard below transition level. Russia and China still use altitudes and flight levels based on meters instead of feet and transition levels/altitudes vary from country to country and at times airport to airport within the same country depending on the altimeter setting.

Actually it does have effect, I hadn't noticed it either but in a mission I created I was using the ATC coms coming back to the airport when I got the altimeter setting from the tower which was much higher than what I had set. I then noticed on starting the mission again that the altimeter wasn't climbing right after liftoff, resetting the altimeter to the setting ATC had used earlier fixed the problem. I've also discovered that if you create any altitude triggers that they are based on the altimeter setting in the mission in meters. Lastly, the altitudes in the Mission Editor and stated in ATC instructions are in meters and do not correspond to the altimeter in the aircraft.

QFE is an altimeter setting given in inches of mercury, mm of murcury or Hecto Pascals/milibars which will equate to your altimeter reading zero on landing at any airport where the QFE conversion is stated. Simply put - QFE is the altimeter setting for altitude above the field or runway to be more exact QNH is the altimeter setting for altitude above mean sea level Russia is still the only country that I know of that uses QFE as a standard below 18,0000 ft. For a quick altimeter pressure conversion calculator go here - http://www.srh.noaa.gov/epz/?n=wxcalc_altimetersetting

First of all I completely agree with wht kylania said, there's no need to load a script through TARGET. However, that being said, there are profiles within the TARGET software for A-10, Black Shark and Falcon 4. Start TARGET, click on Run Configuration and then navigate to the Scripts folder. That's where you'll find the default TARGET profiles

The flight model in BS is excellent and accurately modeled after it's real world counter-part. If it's not turning quick enough for you, chances are the problem is that you are flying it too fast, also use more of the rudder for turns instead of banking - I see too many people trying to fly it like an airplane.

Thanks kylania, I should have been more clear, I was interested in the rearming and refueling on the ground using the Ground Crew option. You have any info on that? Thanks

Hi Guys, I've read a couple of posts on this thread that rearming and refueling are working in B2. I've read and understand the procedures in the manual, but try as I might, I have been unable to get it to work. First of all - does it work? And if it does, would you mind walking me through what you did to get it to work. Thanks in advance.

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?scr=default&end_pos=567&lang=en

hreich, It may be that your changes are being saved where your controller isn't finding them when in the simulation. Try reloading your lua files for your controllers to see if that makes a difference - Launch DCS:A10c, go to options / controls. Click on any line in the column "joystick HOTAS Warthog", then click "LOAD PROFILE" and navigate to " /config/input/Aircrafts/A-10C/Joystick". Select "joystick - hotas warthog.lua" in file list, click OK. Do the same thing for the throttle: Click any line in the column "throttle Hotas Warthog", click "LOAD PROFILE", the navigate to " /config/input/Aircrafts/A-10C/Joystick" and select "throttle - hotas warthog.lua", click OK. I have been able to make changes to the default mappings without any problems after doing this.

Here's a quik track showing what we're talking about. Perhaps this needs to be reported in the Beta forum? RWR anomaly.trk

Actually no - I've turned my RWR on prior to takeoff when I've seen this happen. I'll try and post a track later.

I can confirm this as well - AI calls "Mud Spike" and my RWR is silent.

The N1's and EGT's are the main power instruments. 84 - 86% N1 would be a normal cruise setting.

I spent yesterday afternoon flying Black Shark and Rise of Flight with my new Thrustmaster Warthog to see how I liked it in those sims compared to my NXT/Cubby modified Cougar and am extremely happy with the results. The Thrustmaster Warthog is hands-down the best HOTAS kit released to-date.

I would certainly vote to support that, the Harrier certainly has all the right stuff to fit in with the DCS series nicely and I can only imagine how great a Harrier sim coming from DCS would turn out to be. The F-16 and 15's have been done to death - there's no real excitement for many with these sims and quite honestly, they don't fit the DCS series as well as a Harrier or Apache would, in my opinion.

Hey James, Good to see you still around as well my friend, we've seen a lot of changes over the years haven't we? This is a great piece of gear and far ahead of anything we've had to date. I haven't had time to get my head around the new TARGET software yet, I know it looks pretty, but I have to admit there's a part of me that wishes I could just use the Foxy software with this new kit. There hasn't been anything that I ever needed to do that couldn't be done after burning a few brain cells experimenting in Foxy. Salute Ron

Did you activate the new flight plan after you created it?

It was posted in the Beta Input Controller forum - Here's what it said - Launch DCS:A10c, go to options / controls. Click on any line in the column "joystick HOTAS Warthog", then click "LOAD PROFILE" and navigate to " /config/input/Aircrafts/A-10C/Joystick". Select "joystick - hotas warthog.lua" in file list, click OK. Do the same thing for the throttle: Click any line in the column "throttle Hotas Warthog", click "LOAD PROFILE", the navigate to " /config/input/Aircrafts/A-10C/Joystick" and select "throttle - hotas warthog.lua", click OK. The only thing you have to do after that is to re-map the POV hat on the joystick to the trim. One last thing, the S4 pinky lever on the joystick isn't mapped to anything. I assigned it to the brakes and it works great. Also, that button doesn't push as hard as the others, I thought for a minute I might have a defective stick, but it works just fine. Hope that helps.

Received my Warthog yesterday and am very impressed with the over-all quality. I was the creator of the old Saitek Help web site years ago and have had experience with both the Saitek X36 HOTAS and more recently the Logitec G940. Both are good entry level controllers but limited by their software and other issues. My main setup has been a Uber/Cubby modified Cougar with Hall sensors all around for the last couple of years, which has been a great set-up - solid as a rock, but I have to say that this latest product from Thrustmaster is hands-down the best out-of-the-box HOTAS equipment I have ever experienced in all my years of gaming simulations. Thrustmaster has really out-done themselves. Enough can't be said about the Plug-and-Play feature this HOTAS has with DCS A-10. Following the instructions here in another thread on how to load the Warthog lua files in the game options made for the quickest setup I've ever experienced and it certainly adds an enormous amount of emersion to an already great DCS A-10 simulation. I don't have a lot to add - over what others have already stated here, but I took a few minutes to set up the Warthog in BlackShark today and the results are equally as stunning. The resolution and precision of the Warthog is adding a whole new feel and increased controllability to the KA-50. Anyway, for those looking forward to the receipt of you new Warthogs, I can tell you that you are NOT going to be disappointed! This is one fantastic kit. Enjoy ronht

Serial # 01528 Location: Crystal Lake, Illinois, USA