CyBerkut

As I understand it, Helios can do the network comms and run on a computer other than the computer running DCS. Helios renders its own gauges, so a second copy of DCS does not need to be running on that second machine. Now, MFD displays, ABRIS, etc... that's another matter. Although I think I saw a thread on these forums where somebody was figuring out how to render some displays on a networked computer. You might want to check out the following thread, and subscribe to it: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=86954

I believe the graphics associated with the server machine's Helios computations would have to be displayed via the server machine's graphics card outputs.

Nothing in a Saitek SST profile should preclude you from entering key commands via a keyboard. If you don't have all that much planned for the HOTAS, you could probably be happy just using the DCS interface to set what joystick control does what, and completely leave SST alone.

Thank you, BlackLight UK and EtherealN, for the heads-up. I had to wait until I got home from work to log on to Steam, but it was nice knowing that it would probably be there when I got off from work today. I can confirm that Steam had a CD key ready for me, and that it worked properly to activate my DCS World installed version of A-10C. If anyone else is still waiting for a CD key from Steam, I hope they get it straightened out for you soon!

If somebody becomes aware that the CD Key problem has been resolved on Steam, please post something in here to that effect. Thanks!

Very nice! I'm looking forward to where you take all of this.

I believe what I mentioned was what TriggerHappy had discovered... that using FFB for both Cyclic and Rudder trim simultaneously was not supported / workable. That is a rather different matter than what PeterP's excellent implementation of a stronger Cyclic (via back-to-back MSFFB motor assemblies) involves.

Per the product's web page at Saitek.com: "Ships with support for only Flight Simulator X" As I recall, they supposedly had an API for developing interfacing to other programs, but I have not seen anything produced by anybody for other sims. You could try inquiring directly with Saitek about the API...

Hmmm... No haffers or heffers, but there is this: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heifer

PeterP, the last thing I remember seeing on multiple FFB devices, was that TriggerHappy had determined that it would not work (as of BlackShark version 1). Like yourself, I was looking at adapting an FFB steering wheel to make FFB pedals to use in conjunction with an FFB stick to pursue getting a Force Trim setup working the way it ought to. Perhaps E.D. has incorporated a remedy to that single FFB device limit, but if so, I'm unaware of it. TriggerHappy's solution was to make controllers whose centering system could free float while the trim button was depressed, and lock down (via solenoids) when the trim button was released. Currently, if I ever get off my butt, that would be the approach I would pursue also. Mine wouldn't be nearly as nice as TriggerHappy's though. I like that rudder pedal design you posted that could accomodate both helicopter and fixed wing style trimming. Very nice concept!

Hmmm... Are you thinking of spraying the inflated ball with something to harden it enough to hold the spherical shape (and then cut out the section that you need to project upon)?

That looks like a good idea. The price of the ball looks painful, but that seems like a good size.

In Soviet Russia, the horse rides you! Sorry... I couldn't resist.

'One file to rule them all, and in the darkness, bind them!' ;)

Can't help on that mystery. I've found myself wondering the same from time to time. He was a pretty creative fellow, but unfortunately some folks got stiffed on orders that they had placed and paid for.

Maybe the B-2ish decoy's weren't fully inflated yet... ;)

If you are looking to create a hard core sim, then 3rd person is NOT the way to go. You may make your programming tasks easier by taking some of the cockpit controls, etc. out of the equation, but you're doing it at the cost of sacrificing much of the piloting experience.

http://mwomercs.com There, you will see what constitutes "hard core" mech simulation, and the forums will show you what the mecha community wants. Another place to see what the mecha community wants is http://www.mektek.net

Indeed I was. That's OK though. If you have some time to kill, and want to know more, you can truck on over to http://mwomercs.com. The forums are highly active, but a lot of that should probably be skipped over. [ Lots of BattleTech fiction / tabletop game fans prattling on / whining / showing off their vast formidable knowledge of the arcane ]. The truly useful things to read at this point are the Developer Blogs and FAQs. One of the important take aways is that the developers are *true* BattleTech fans. It isn't just business for them (although they appear to be tending to that properly), but a real love for the concepts and lore. From what I can see so far, they have a great vision, and are making all the right moves. As long as they get the money side of it right, it looks like we're in for a lot of fun!

Hehehe... I can see how it could look that way to you, Jinja. It's waaay more complicated than that. (Not on a par with a DCS title, but there are things to learn). Weapons fire generates heat. Heat levels have to be managed, of you end up with your mech powering down, or blowing up (or possibly cooking off stored ammunition, causing damage). There are various weapon types, each with advantages and drawbacks. Mech configurations can be varied... not only on weapons, but armor, engine, electronics, etc. There are various mech chassis. Some are smaller and faster. Some are bigger, slower, and packing more firepower / armor. There are various roles to fulfill. Choosing an appropriate mech, and configuring it the best way to suit your style will be part of the challenge. Battles in this version will apparently involve more participants than earlier MW titles. Right now, they are talking about 12 vs 12.

Shouldn't that be "Gadroc" instead of "Gardoc"? Nice 'pit !!!

PeterP, that is super nice. Well done! I've been kicking around a plan to convert my old Saitek X-52 throttle into a collective control (generic though, not Ka-50 style). I picked up a bicycle brake (a long time ago) for the position holding of the collective arm... but your solution is much more elegant than what I was planning! I may have to appropriate that idea. ;) Once again, well done! And congrats on the new addition to the family!

Errr... what is it that you think should be in there? Keep in mind, they haven't even gotten to Beta testing yet. This is a PC title. If it ever makes it on to XBox, it will be adapted back from this. It doesn't appear to be dumbed down for XBox, from what I can see. As for tactics, etc.... they are adding in what they call "Information Warfare" and putting a lot of emphasis on "Role Warfare". Their goal is make it where running a smaller mech (a scout, or whatever) can be as rewarding as piloting a big ol' assault mech. Joysticks / HOTAS will be supported. We know at least one of the developers is using a Logitech G940 (and has three LCD displays). As for game play, it's all online multi-player. They may make some training area where you can learn the controls etc. without it screwing up your record... but AFAIK there is no plan for a single player / campaign mode. They ditched that concept when they couldn't get a publisher for the MW5/MW Rebooted game they started out making. Hence the move to a Free To Play model.

I guess it must have been. It looked to me like the writing would be upside down when the canopy/door was closed, though...

Their forums are at http://mwomercs.com There are a number of developer blogs, and also Q & A postings that have revealed quite a bit already on how things will work. They have not announced TrackIR support (yet), but looking at all of the effort that has been put into the cockpits, and how the video has the pilot's view panning around... I'd be VERY surprised if head tracking was not supported. I'd guess that TrackIR is nearly a sure thing. It will be interesting to see if they also manage to support/allow alternatives (Kinect PC, Free Track, Face Track). The developers are hard core BattleTech fans, and to the extent that it is feasible, they appear to be staying true to canon. So far, it looks VERY promising.