Thx1137
-
Posts
72 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Thx1137
-
-
This happened to me if I used my previous DCS MT link from the Windows task bar.
I deleted that link and created a new one from the bin-mt folder, that let me choose DLAA again.
-
1
-
-
I find it a bit hard to understand what you're saying but it sounds like stalling. Maybe you think stalling is based on speed (it isn't) or think any modelled aircraft will somehow prevent stalling for you automatically (they won't)?
If you aren't stalling then I think people need to see a video that includes your control inputs.
-
2
-
-
I'd have thought so but as a guess, they probably put more emphasis on developing the ability to fight using a normally setup aircraft.
I wonder if they would have to a new flight model for every possible switch combination. That would be an obscene amount of work.
-
1
-
-
There is plenty written about pitch already so maybe read those. Yes, it is sensitive in the real jet and can feel weird/oscillate on takeoff if you don't fly it correctly. That said, there will be some *minor* flight model tweaks in the patch so it may change though I think only slightly.
The aircraft isn't FBW like the F18 or F16 so yes, trim changes are made after any airspeed change. You fly it like a normal airplane.
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, LucShep said:
Ditto.
This, a million times.
We all love detail but, there comes a point that it's unnecessary, it becomes superfluous. * looks at the silly panels details on F15E and BS3... "why??" *1, A poly not seen is probablyusually not drawn so it doesn't necessarily consume frames.
2. Just because you don't want something doesn't mean many others do. It isn't all about you/us.
Re #2, I also don't care about opening non-useful panels so I actually agree. But, not everyone is like me and I don't think my taste makes everyone elses less important.
3. If a person making a feature wants to add something because they want to, who are we to tell them not to make what they want. It is *their* product. We just buy into what they create.
-
Everyone, MFD is on the list of things not yet implemented.
See https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Jackjack171 said:
It's almost as if people do not research or know much about the planes that they claim to love in here. Add to it the unnecessary comparisons of other aircraft. This is an EA module and yet people are putting her in the hangar complaining already. Before that it was all "Release the Kraken." My oh my!
This is an awesome module. Thank you RAZBAM.Yeah, we want it now! Even if it isn't finished and full of bugs!
Then, yuck! it has bugs or it is unfinished!
History repeats, a lot.
-
3
-
-
I don't have many custom keybinds for the F15E but I have trouble with the laser arm side of the WSO panel in that it often doesn't activate on a key press. It can update on one press or rake more than ten presses. All my other aircraft are reliable in that regard.
I haven't found a reliable way to cause it to fail yet to log it.
-
19 minutes ago, richskinns said:
The Ground crew for wheel chocks command does not work when starting a mission from the ground cold. e.g the option when you can place the AC anywhere.
The MIC switch positioning has no impact. No comms
Huh? I and I know of several others start all missions cold and never have an issue talking to ground crew if we turn the switch on.
-
1
-
-
I found it tough because I'm used to the hornet. But this beast needs to be landed quite differently.
Most of the time I have trouble stopping now is because I'm too heavy. Given the standard F15 has a landing distance of 7,500 ft (2,300 m), according to Google, it seems about right. It uses almost 4/5 of the runway at my local international airport going by those numbers.
-
On 6/12/2023 at 6:20 PM, OnReTech said:
Thank you. I think what we'll do is, International airfields - the lights will always be on. At military airfields, they will ON when a takeoff or landing is requested.
Added to to-to list.
For mixed/civilian airports then always on is good. I personally don't mind your idea for military too.
A couple of other options:
1. If it is possible then you may consider a real life alternative which is to use Pilot Activated Lighting. Typically you would key a comm microphone on a specific frequency and it would turn the lights on for a while. EG: You could toggle the comm radio three times in succession to toggle the lighting.
2. If it is possible, then a shortcut key that turns on/toggles the lighting for the "closest" airfield to the aircraft.
3. Maybe a menu option to turn on/off closest airfield lights.
I say "closest" in the last two options because I think having controls for ever airfield might add too much clutter. Dunno.
-
1
-
-
Heh, I took my own advice and I found I had a key I forgot about that toggles between the map and the pilot view. So that was my issue.
-
11 hours ago, chandawg1 said:
That is weird, I have never had the F10 map load, but yeah when I press F1 it doesn't go into the pit
Thanks for the tip, I would have thought the other way around, I did check though, and have a "fresh" shortcut from the re-install.
It has been over a week and I have heard nothing from any RAZBAM or ED developer concerning whether or not this is a bug. Every other module I own runs without issue, so I don't really understand.
I'd check your F1 Pilot View keybind in the F15 settings to make sure it isn't bound to an "always down" button. That is about the only thing I can think off.
I don't think Razbam reply here much but if you go to their discord there is always someone there, after all, that is their support location. Whether they can tell you anything is another question. I expect most of them are seriously busy at the moment.
-
For comparison.
1 minute 40 second to go from desktop to menu screen for me in MT mode. That includes about 20 second compiling reshade shaders. I have a fast m.2 drive and 12th Gen i7-12700F, 2100 Mhz, 12 Cores with 32mb of fairly slow RAM.
Some Sinai based missions were taking a long time to load but I used to have preload radius set to max. At 70,000 it is a fair bit faster.
-
I sometimes have the F10 map come up. But I press F1 and have no trouble controlling the plane. I think it is only when spawning in air so it doesn't happen much, most of the time I spawn cold and dark. Other than that, I've no idea why it happens.
-
15 hours ago, Holbeach said:
70000lb. T/O.
Set T/O trim.
Full AB. At rotation speed, 155 kts give half stick for 1 sec. for 12 deg attitude.
Nose wheel lift off at 170 kts.
Lift off at 190 kts.
Gear up, flaps up, trim fwd.
From the RL manual. Works perfectly.
..
Thanks for that. This beast is certainly different.
I think we are mostly used to an aircrafts nose rising at rotation speed quickly followed by the mains. But in this case you need to wait a little longer and not play with the pitch to force the aircraft into the air. Then, relax the pitch and don't push it down. I find it hard to describe but being smooth is key too.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Recoil16 said:
I wouldn't be so sure. SkyVector, and likely some of the other maps and charts there are copyrighted and not freely licensed or in the public domain.
I agree. I certainly wouldn't republish them unless I had a copy of the agreement, preferably from the charts owners, to see what exactly is allowed. I would think it would be OK if a sim org could use them freely but best to be sure!
-
My guess... If the camera is moving with the plane then I expect that will probably act like auto-stabilisation. To see the movement you would need something else that is close to the aircraft. The terrain wouldn't be enough.
-
13 hours ago, SMH said:
Why wouldn't you give this static mesh a series of LODs just like any other static object gets?
This was a major selling point for this map, promoted by ED in the news letters and product page. I'm disappointed.I think it is pretty clear from the earlier comments that a "static" mesh doesn't support LODs. You need a dynamic mesh for that and DCS, it seems, doesn't support the higher resolution. In which case it would be EDs task to improve.
-
4
-
-
23 minutes ago, tripod3 said:
What is the size of Sinai map on SSD?
I saw different information: 120 - 350 Gb. Why so large, are there really so much details we have never seen before?
I dunno buy or no but want
Huh? Yo saw wrong. According to the modules sale page, where you buy it and it lists its features. It says 55.2GB.
-
2
-
-
22 hours ago, Hiob said:
Improvements are very welcome, but from my pov it depends a bit on the lighting. In bright daylight (mid day sun) everything looks pretty dull and boring. That adds to the general problem that somebody else pointed out, that from inside the cockpits, the outside world looks over exposed.
I'm not sure if that is unique to sinai.
Also, if the buildings in a given location tend to be a fairly uniform colour it looks worse. EG: Some parts of the world have a lot of light buildings to reflect heat better without using air conditioning. This may be the case here but I've not seen this region in real life but looking at Google street view a lot of it seems pretty uniform light colour.
As we can see in beauty shots in most games, the shots are taken when there will be shadows cast. Which is something like what you're talking about.
We can know that the Sinai map can look spectacular as long as the mission planner sets the time at interesting parts of the day, morning or evening so I'm not concerned by it. Night time looks darn fantastic.
So I think it is a combination of things. Game engine, time of day and common building colours in the region.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, OnReTech said:
But there is a way out, it is necessary to modify the TDK a little so that these static pieces fall into the general mesh of the terrain.
Wow, that sounds tough to do well in such a big map where someone can create missions anywhere they want!
Sorry to suggest yet another task! It might be worth having a map image where mission makers can see where the enhanced mesh areas are so they know where to plan their helicopter missions?
-
4
-
1
-
-
On 6/2/2023 at 5:47 PM, Bremspropeller said:
In the current state of things, I'd agree with you. If DCS some time manages to get the whole logistics stuff on board, things might change. I'm personally not too interested into gunships, as there's other modules for making things go boom already. I'm more into transporting stuff, logistics, throwing out a couple of paras, looking for a tiny dinghy adrift in the vast ocean or doing infil/ exfil stuff. That's where transports do widen the spectrum of missions in DCS. Niche maybe - maybe - but so are combat flight sims in general and if a transport pulls over a couple of civvies who want to fly a Herc under fire, then that's great.
I think people will have a lot of fun doing Khe Sanh (logistics under fire) or Kolwezi ops (dropping para commandos in a small scale conflict), which are just two examples for borader logistical or smaller scale commando style operations. The latters will be fun in combinaton with the light attack helos (Bo 105, Gazelle update, Kiowa).
You could even design humanitarian throw-out-a-bag-of-food missions with time constraints and triggers challenging and fun.
I would prefer flying cargo or SAR maybe 80% of the time rather than shoot things all the time. So if DCS supported logistics that would be perfect for me.
A C130 is in development and it looks like ED are adding some logistics support for that module so I'm excited about that. I love big planes. I'd love to have a good and fairly easy to use supply line gameplay. I think it would open up a world of strategic and tactical opportunities. But maybe we can't have that until at least part of the dynamic mission system is in.
-
1
-
-
I tried twice at night and I couldn't see them until I was at 8nm or just under. It may have been hidden for a short time by the hud symbology but I was looking around the hud to get it out of view so I'm sure I couldn't see them at 10nm.
I haven't tried this patch during the day yet.
I'm running 1440p, 2D with most settings maxed out on a RTX 4080.
stuttering on 2.9
in Game Performance Bugs
Posted
I've always wondered if the efficiency cores on the newer chips could be a problem. I'm retired so I no longer bother keep up with the constant changes in software and hardware but clearly they aren't "normal" cores so they should be treated differently. If a game sees 20 cores and 8 of them are efficiency cores then can it utilse each kind of core properly? How much is under dev control and how much, if any, is automatically managed by the chipset?
The devil is in the details. I often found that how a low level feature worked in real life was never as simple as some documentation might have us believe. And if we don't know how the system works in a lot of detail it can be damn tough to troubleshoot!
Hmm. That's interesting. It might be time to read up