Ali Fish

+1 from me, fantastic help there.

i find it rude & cheeky to see these polls for what the public wants.Clearly Ed will provide what they believe the public wants and what there capable of delivering on in a timely manner. just let ed do it please. we all know the A-10 is next . just leave it at that FGS !

yes. this looks like somthing of interest. thank you. i would actually like a mission like this to practice with, simple waves of advancing enemy objects not necissarily weapons hot. somthing to practice observation and tracking in black shark......

its not a cheat and can never be viewed as a cheat. it simply overcomes the limitations users have without trackir. an enhanced view system. thats all.

Id like to pose the question "Cant the modellor do the uv wrapping/unwrapping. " ? EDIT: oops. didnt realise the requirements have been relaxed some what..... interesting..

http://starwraith3dgames.home.att.net/evochronlegends/index.htm a modern day equivalent of elite.

Damnit lol that was going to be my joke when i read the OP KA50 attacks aberystwyth !

i must be bold and say "this is one feature i would like removed". i understand the realism 101% thing but. i just cant be bothered thinking about this next to the rest of the workload required. just my opinion. a more scalable easy/hard setting is really what im after tbh. id love to have easy/hard settings for each independant system within this chopper.

Great suggestion !

wow. is this documented in the manual ?

something tells me the bug list is getting bigger and bigger. Its funny, we cant decide whats russian technology or just bugged lol.or dare i say it "both" ,just kiddin. not a good combo though for my understandings....

ive seen the nellis range pics. and now it brings the question. "how will this area of scenery be introduced within DCS ?" would i be right in saying it has to be a seperate entity and therefore scenery will go down a modular path where development on non Caucasus scenery is concerned.

i think the proof is in the pudding. these reviewers dont have the 1 month+ to read and take in the manual alongside the forum chat and attempt to undertsand this sim in its entirity and then have fun in it. what we read, from what id class as massmarket gaming review sites, Is that of a Point of view review. I actually applaud the review scores they have given, because it shows a very professianl approach to somthing they actually dont really have to time to understand. just think how it could really have come out. Im also glad they have the abbility to use easy flight and easy avionics, without those assists they wouldnt have even got of the ground. and that would have left a pretty upsetting review. Its obvious u can only expect a proper review from a serious or notoriously good website specifying in sim related software. thats the only place im going to enjoy reading about blackshark imo.. read BS review in PCGamer mag today 82%, think its same magazine. Dont forget that alot of the website based sites offer user review posts. be nice to see some from you lot on there??

how much of the A-10 thats used for the military desktop sim will be used for this dcs title?. will it be translated to russian and then back again. Wouldnt it make sense to release a western based jet first in english and translation to russian and other variants afterwards? ohh and when might we expect to see the first Glowing Amraam movie ft DCS A10 ????

so... btw is that 9 months till the russian release of A10, for this occasion what comes first the russian or the english version ?

pertaining to the use of FF and Non FF joysticks. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=635731&postcount=45 2 options in game somehow. flight characteristics for non FF and FF sticks. even if it strays further from reality. Personally having a non FF stick has instantly taken this sim out of a complete reality anyway. So to have the sim adjusted for the fact we dont all have FF sticks would be welcomed by me immensly. and im sure other non FF stick users might think likewise. i know this means a simplification to the sim for us non ff users. The work load we have at present is one thing but adding to that for non FF stick users is just too much. I propose that when a non FF stick is trimmed in flight, to change that cyclic input the user should match where the stick is trimmed (much like the FF users stick remains in position) before the cyclic engages to provide new input parameter. thus with a non FF stick we can imitate the use of the FF sticks where this sim is concerned.

am i correct in assuming that for non FF stick users this sim will and can never function like the real helicopter,bold statement i know. but just a suggestion. the work load for a FF stick is one thing but for non FF users like myself we have to instantly think in strange terms where this whole flight theory is concerned. I have to believe my stick is somewhere its not when trimmed and how to counter act problem when looking to apply a new input for the helicopter. the result is x2 workload for pilot. Is this realism ? Heres how i think the controls should work. 2 options in game somehow. flight characteristics for non FF and FF sticks. even if it strays further from reality. Personally having a non FF stick has instantly taken this sim out of a complete reality anyway. So to have the sim adjusted for the fact we dont all have FF sticks would be welcomed by me immensly. and im sure other non FF stick users might think likewise. i know this means a simplification to the sim for us non ff users. The work load we have at present is one thing but adding to that for non FF stick users is just too much. I propose that when a non FF stick is trimmed in flight, to change that cyclic input the user should match where the stick is trimmed (much like the FF users stick remains in position) before the cyclic engages to provide new input parameter. thus with a non FF stick we can imitate the use of the FF sticks where this sim is concerned. Asides this i feel its necessary to include some documentation about the necessity to use a FF stick to expereince the true potential of this might fine piece of study simulation software.

im also interested in the systems that 'calculate climb values'. If there is such a thing. i.e. Is height taken into account by the pvr? And will autopilot follow this? Still a noob here -but getting there.

may i just say. im using my 4.5 year old PC with BS and it rocks. 1 gig ram. running at 2.0 ghz (3gig amd) GF-7800 (AGP 256). very very surprised. 25 fps in cockpit when stressed and 30-50fps on external. Maybe i should be thankfull its been released with DX8 only capability !!!! anyway ..... medium settings here with shkval set to 512. no heat blur, medium viz range. and no civillian traffic. i also think the recommended specs and minimum are very realistic, most realistic ive seen quoted.

having looked at these non blurred textures along side the originals. A little more blur and transparecny via the alpha,s should be possible. but what i dont like here is ED,s implementation of this concept. had they made a full disc setup (not individual blade arangement) they could have given us all exactly what we want. the animation appears to be a 1 step tranformation no blur to blur. with the disc idea showing all blades on 1 texture they could have had slightly less detailed blades at the stationary level but asides that with this full rotor disc representation they could have given us a 2 or 3 stage animation process which in turn would give us the optical effects we are looking for. as well as a stereotypical blurred rotor blade. in my racing sims texture jobs. we didnt texture 1 spoke of a wheel we texture them all. and through the animation processes set with timing. u have a blurred wheel that can appear to counter rotate visually at varying speeds. i believe ultimatly this is what we are looking for from this rotor blur thread. what could work though is to blur the stationery rotor blade texture and blur the blur effect texture more. stationery it might look crap but in motion its gona look alot better.i'll probally try this idea later on..

i found those recording hilarious. very reminsicent of my first adventures in that cockpit. "why am i spinning shep"... <explosion sound> .... what would be good for BS training would be a function to view another pilots cockpit and actions via spectate mode. That training in essence wasnt very good for the folks that crashed. Is/was there some insight into what gave cause for there loss of control i.e what procedure did they miss, was it the lack of change in some autopilot system whilst transitioning into differing flight states...etc etc...or was it the fact the pilot never trimmed into the hover that made his bird spin....i expereince these strange traits of the helicopter that cause loss of control too. so where do folks go wrong.... i know theres logical answers and im nearly on top of them..... i must be at around 60 hours of reading and learning from the manual, the forums, the ingame training & wags's videos but its still not enough. The key areas are missing such as the overal unique russian systems philosophy. all this training tells u what to do stage by stage. but it never emphasises what not to do and its cause and effect and solution. i think what im really asking for is that training expereince where it all clicks into place. One that explains any and all of the grey areas not explained elsewhere . the extended pilots theory manual.. like what to do when u accidentally did this manual.. does anyone catch ma drift ????

there are stages when we should see a static looking rotor all be it blurred to varying degrees, even from within the cockpit. when its rpm meets the X value and coincides with what were viewing in its re fresh rate. it does occur, just like when viewing a cars wheel accelerating. in BS It would liven the eye candy up immensly... lol what is the refresh rate of the human brain & our optical systems...

i think ED are simply coming from a realism aspect with how they have implemented it, but it leaves me a question that i touched on earlier. the tutorial vids have exceptional looking animated rotor. if my eyes arn't being decieved as maybe the case is, then this feature is coming i think with an updated graphics module,

i agree on the rotor blur requirment. iam a racing sim designer. i have been swapping the stationary 3d model to a blurred texture for years now. DX7,8,9 ...not just for nice looking in game effects, but for performance issues ie less 3D model = more framerates. The central hub could stay 3D in motion and still not look to bad. IMO the blades need animated. One thing i noticed was in matts tutorial videos things 'seemed' alot nicer blade animation wise!!!.

some nice work in here, what about rotor slap ? for me in DCS black shark there is not enough spank. pardon the expression. but a dynamic spanking sound is for me what needs improved. at present its just not enough . i wana feel its slapping me in the face !....