Svsmokey

It is sometimes difficult for we 20 or 30+ year simmers to appreciate just how overwhelmed someone new to DCS and simming can be . I'm all in favor of any methodology to make that transition easier .

Totally unqualified wild guess here . Turbo core defaulted to off with bios update ? I'd check the memory , too , to make sure XMP (or equivalent) is still on .

If you're asking for help , you might consider making the post more readable .

ROFL !

I'm saying the available runways further limit basing options , which further increases the threat level , unless of course , as Tippis suggests , there need be no threat . At which point , just check "invulnerable" and "unlimited" ammo and be done with it . Yeah , the bipe was paid for by someone . I dare say a B52 might cost just a bit more . ED has stated unequivocally that they are not interested in modeling more than two engines . I could further refute counter-arguments , but i'm not gonna further beat this dead horse . Enjoy your fantasies

1: B-52's bombing North Vietnam were based in Guam , not Da Nang . B-52's bombing Afghanistan are based in Diego , not Kandahar . The idea is to protect a strategic national asset , while accomplishing the mission . The only exception that i am aware of is the Gulf , and i would love to be educated as to how that decision was arrived at . But even so , the 500 km maps in DCS can't compare to the ~1400 range of those missions , and the threats more than merely Scuds . 2: Within our ~ 500 km maps , you need a 10k-foot runway for combat operations , limiting basing options , and effectively putting your assets Even closer to red . 3 : We agree on one thing...we're beating a dead horse There are many reasons why i personally wouldn't want a B-52 , but that's irrelevant . More to the point , there are many reasons why imo a flyable B-52 will not ever be in DCS . 4x the number of engines ED has expressed an interest in modeling . Map sizes . The fact that it requires multicrew to fulfill a mission on a scale not yet seen. Not many people would enjoy crewing the downstairs positions , and AI is less than satisfactory . Imo , the cost developing the module would far exceed the revenue from sales . Finally , can we refrain from characterizing people who disagree as "ignorant" , "not knowing what you're talking about" etc ? It's just a game , and a different opinion is not a personal attack .

I do not ! But if i answer "no" to the first question , why would i pay at least $80 in the second ? Also , the first question is poorly worded , as there are several reasons i would not buy the module , not just one .

I would have answered no to the first question , for several reasons including map size . However the second question regarding module price did not have a "0" dollar option (required if the first option is no) so i did not participate in the poll .

Sorry for the confusion . I was not referring to multi-role aircraft . I was referring to an earlier attempt to develop inter-service aircraft , (navy-airforce) , which didn't work then , and remains the source of some of the -35s problems and cost now .

Glad you're feeling better .

Your own map belies your point . But that's ok . Scream all you want if it makes you feel better , but...it's Nevah . Gonna . Happen .

They didn't learn their lesson . One-size-fits-all inter-service design was tried before , and the resulting debacle led to the F-111 and the F-14 going their separate ways .

I wouldn't have gotten away with that joke if it wasn't ambiguous

I initially made that mistake as well . Look closer at the post . He said B-58 . Your points are valid for the B52 though .

I've got the Coronavirus . Love to sit on the beach with a cold one .

You really should be more discriminate with your sources And "UFO" means nothing more than UNIDENTIFIED flying object , not ALIEN flying object . I once saw a UFO myself , and still can't explain it , but have no inclination to automatically ascribe it to other-worldly beings .

I'm feelin' ya man ! Looking forward to your review , particularly as you have all 3 headsets i'm considering as Facebook replacements .

Very helpful - thanks !

Glad you're happy with them . I , too , used VR Optician lenses on CV1 and RiftS , and can't say enough good things about them .

Searching "8kx" in these forums yields 14 pages of posts...

Indeed it is . Can't say i much care for the fact that you must run Viveport and Steam VR with this headset , unlike all previous Vives .

I find the pilot body very helpful for immersion . I don't fly modules that don't have one . I especially appreciate the clever animations tied to Hotas/rudder movements . I have the switch mapped for on/off to access controls i otherwise could not .

I could , but i won't waste the time .

Certainly not on the scale of DCS , or anywhere near , but I've written several , in fact . "Very easily fixable" indeed...

...meaning good for no one ! These threads are a waste of time as their proponents are incapable of understanding finite resources , whether in terms of development effort , or what a pc can handle . "It would be possible/simple/easy to"- says the guy who never wrote a program .