EtherealN

Yeah, sorry, I misspoke, yes; the UEFIs/BIOS interrogates the controller (in this case CPU) for compatible settings, and configures according to this. On a Z68 release this means "2nd gen Core" and, in this specific case, i7-2600k. And: http://ark.intel.com/products/52214 It is correct that if using a "3rd gen" (Ivy Bridge) CPU, this level becomes 1600.

"Underclocking" to 1333mhz is not an incompatibility; you have a 68-series motherboard chipset. Intel specification for those is that everything above 1333mhz is overclocked, therefore it will never set memory to that speed on it's own no matter what the JEDEC profiles might say. Did you clean the CPU surface of old thermal interface paste and reapply new after this cleaning had had time to properly dissipate? If there's old thermal interface paste still there, or a trapped layer of cleaning fluid on the heatspreader, what you are seeing might very well be a thermal stop - the UEFI is halting the computer in order to stop your CPU from (literally) burning. Does your mobo have lights or number set viewvable so that you can see during which step it halts?

Hate to burst your bubble, but the majority of "32-bitters" I've run into through support line have been americans. Careful with those prejudices. ;)

Incorrect. Minimum system requirements are, as far as is relevant here, 3GB of RAM and 512MB of video memory. Fits (just) inside the 4GB space of a 32-bit Windows system running Dx9. Video memory isn't relevant to framerates here as long as you don't max said memory; if only having 512MB of video memory, you'll potentially see performance issues if you set textures to max. So don't. I think you failed to understand my point. Why? Are you a mindreader? I have personally aided people that made this mistake - specifically they kept their old windows copy and reinstalled that on their new machine. You see, one was a retired vietnam pilot who has no issues at all learning complex aircraft systems, but he just never got around to reading up on what this 32-bit vs 64-bit thing was. His old windows worked, he didn't see a reason to change that when getting new hardware. This is COMMON. And it's not because people are lazy, or stupid. Quite the opposite; they are often people that are very busy with this thing called "real life", and just never got around to learning all that much about how computers work. But a little now and then, they might want to try reliving their glory days on a simbox. Did you notice that I picked up my numbers not of overall computer sales. I picked them up from computers that, in the previous month, accessed Valve's Steam service - which you may recalled is used towards playing computer games. See where I'm going? :) I'm not saying it's smart, I'm just stating the actual facts. 32-bit users isn't something you can just shrug off. (Well, not if you're actually making a living based on people buying your games rather than just playing them yourself as a hobby.)

Already mentioned, in this thread and in newsletters as well as announcements, that this is indeed planned for the near future. ;)

Point is that as far as the example goes, that changes nothing. 32-bit OS is already explicitly not supported on the Steam sales channel. But there's still Steam customers with 32-bit OS popping up asking why it doesn't work; often it has never occured to them that "32-bit" would be an issue in any game at all, if they even know what that means. And that's a big part of "the market" that think like that, actually. They have better things to do than to nerd out and learn silly things like what 32-bit and 64-bit actually means. (And, even worse, there's still people out there buying 32-bit OSes, on machines with 8+GB of RAM, because they remember reading 7-8 years ago that 64-bit OSes are slower and with bad drivers...) Now, again, those are all bad reasons to still be using a 32-bit OS. But the reality for ED is that there still are a lot of those people around, making it a very hard decision to drop support for them; you can imagine how it might feel to say "you know what, I'm going to make a change to the product that will block almost a quarter of my potential market"... ;)

A look at Steam hardware survey told me that 22,65% of consumer machines running the Steam service still use 32-bit operating systems. I agree that it's silly that they do that, but that is a pretty nice chunk of the gaming market that's still running 32-bit operating systems. And it should be noted that even though 64-bit is noted as an actual requirement (as opposed to recommendation) on the DCS salesfront, there's still people showing up with 32-bit issues over there.

Agreed. My x-52 also developed a problem with the connector. Fortunately just in time for the release of the TM Warthog, so I didn't bother looking at conducting repairs. (In my case it works most of the time, but sometimes glitches off.)

What are you asking? If you want to take a screenshot, there is a dedicated key for that on your keyboard - Print Screen. Saves screen data to clipboard, can paste into any program you like. Or just Paint.

No, it means their GC said radars are clear, and their own radars were clear... because the threat was a one that neither sets of radars could detect in those circumstances. You cannot react to what you cannot see. That's the whole point of stealth technologies.

You are forgetting something: The F-22 would be up there anyways They don't get deployed to sit on a ramp. They get deployed to fly. While they are flying, they do whatever needs doing. Sometimes a drone might need help, sometimes an airliner with transponder issues needs checking out, sometimes there's a ship that needs eyeballing, sometimes there's a political adversary that needs to get a reminder that "hey, we're here, don't do funny stuff". With respect, you don't quite seem to understand how these things work. AWACS are always flying a little here and there. Fighters are always flying CAPs and stuff - even if only to keep pilot currency up. (That's worth a LOT of fuel!)

Offtopic, but if you want to play budget cards, remember that even the complete disbanding of the US armed forces - the whole shebang - would not be enough to plug it. ;) But on the previous note: if you have both fighters AND surveillance assets up, you can look at guys from 30k feet AND intercept hostile air assets at the same time. ;) And do recall that fighters will be up anyway, it's what fighters do: they fly CAPs and all sorts of things. HVAA escort is one of those things they can do at the same time; as mentioned, escort duty does not entail flying in formation with the escortee.

After purchase, go here: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/myserials.php Unlink the serial number and it will become his when he first uses it online. Alternatively, gift it to him on Steam.

DICE has like 3-4 times as many programmers than ED has staff... :P There's a lot of things that would be awesome to have, but resources are limited and it comes down to priorities. Sad but true.

It's a complex system. Complex systems fail a little now and then. Nothing strange there. Redundancies reduce the risk of catastrophic failures, but do not eliminate them.* If two systems each have a certain risk of failing, but are redundant for each other, we will never hear about the times one of them failed. But the law of large numbers says that eventually there will be a time when they all fail at the same time. Goes for human-piloted aircraft too; I recently enjoyed reading about an incident in (I think) the mid 80's when a swedish JA-37 out on a flight proceeded to intercept and ward off a danish J-35. Problem was, the JA-37 pilot (in spite of having nav instruments, GC contact etcetera) was actually the intruder because he didn't notice he had flown into denmark. Ooops. Similarly, there have been cases where computer malfunctions, in spite of the equipment having redundancies, have erroneously ejected pilots or instructed them to eject. Things happen, even if they are unlikely. Being unlikely just means they don't happen very often. (Another classic is the case of the US airman whose aircraft caught fire during aerial refueling; first his ejection seat failed, then canopy jettison failed, then the chute failed, then the backup chute failed... lots of things in that chain that are very unlikely to fail, but they all did...) Because people are naturally less critical of "news" that confirm their presuppositions and thus don't put them under the same scrutiny as they would news that contradict their presuppositions (or, for that matter, their ideological standpoints etcetera). * Remember the good old adage: whenever you invent a foolproof system, someone else invents a better fool. :)

First things to check: - Please doublecheck that the activation request is for the product you believe it to be; remember that activation is requested for all non-activated products, not just the one for the aircraft you are starting. You can see identity of the module in top left of activation request. - What is the exact error message you receive? When and where does this occur? - Have you ensured that you actually received the Ka-50 UPGRADE module? Best way to ensure this is to use the downloadable installer: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/modules/dcs_black_shark_2_upgrade/ - Regarding the above, see this picture to compare with your activation dialog:

I had to close it when I saw how horrible the lipsync was.

Your description is about downloading through the module manager, correct? An alternative while this is being looked into is to download from the website: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/dcs_world/ You can download either normally through the browser, or via the supplied BitTorrent links. Then simply double-click the downloaded file and it will detect your DCS World install and get you going. EDIT: Also, can you give me your ticket number? I can look at the support ticket.

You forgot that the AN/ALR-69 is not the only system feeding data to what we colloquially call "the RWR" display in the cockpit. Multiple threat detecton and evaluation systems feed in there, including the MWS (warns against missile launches by detecting the plume of a rocket motor) and laser detection equipment. Indata from all sources is handled by onboard computers and the combined threat picture then displayed on your "RWR" scope.

No DCS World module will show up in TiR profile list, because they all run inside DCS World. It is DCS World, and DCS World only, that can be detected by TiR. (And as mentioned, this might show as "black shark" in the TiR game list.)

Don't spoil it man. I'm still high on imagining the expression on the face of the F4 crew. :D

Except dedicated surveillance platforms are typically way better at the surveillance job, because that's what they were made to do. ;) For example, I would imagine that the MQ-1 can loiter way longer than an F-22 can, meaning you get a lot less issues with getting gaps in your surveillance due to running to tankers or having to do handoffs. (Flying a tanker track 16 miles from Iranian airspace is probably not something they want to do.) The escort fighters can standby at a proper range (and, if necessary, in proximity to tanker assets), then respond when AWACS calls in threats. Consider these options: 1x MQ-1 2x Fighters Possibly a tanker and/or AWACS Compared to: 2x fighters Another 2x fighters on rotation (hell, possibly even 4x fighters on rotation, depending on turnaround times) And then the tanker etcetera. (And just to be sure there is no confusion: doing HVAA escort does not entail flying in "formation" with the HVAA. This is a mistake we see a lot of people do on open online servers, "escorting" friendly strikers through flying their F-15's or Flankers etcetera low and slow next to them...)

What you said was: This means that you consider "crap like contrails" and "proper ingame comms" to be in competition for development time. The only way they could be in competition for development time is if the same programmers were to have worked on the features. The contrails are, mainly, a graphics thing. Thus, since you feel the contrails are an erroneous prioritization and ingame comms should have had priority over it (there is no other way to interpret your statement); yes, you actually are saying that the graphics guys should create ingame comms. ;) If that is not what you meant, you can rephrace.

This is the popular wisdom, and it's false. Yes, it's less of a problem than in, for example, BF. But the better things go with stuff like DCS World now being on Steam, the more of an issue it is going to be. But really, no: there is no direct causal link between being able to understand aircraft operation and being able to behave. If there was, we wouldn't need moderators on this forum either! :D

From the forum rules: 4.5. - Be respectful of other members' bandwidth. Keep image sizes down, use the attachment function to thumbnail images, do not quote images, minimize image signatures, etc. If you find posts that in your opinion are problematic in regards to this rule, please don't hesitate to link us to it or report it and, if necessary, we would discuss it with the offender or take other action as we see fit. I have no problem with people wanting perfect images, but this forum is not a vernissage for your digital photography. It is always possible to have your least-compressed, just-perfect, filesize monsters someplace else, and post rationally compressed jpegs here. (Besides, if you want perfect, you don't want jpegs at all. :P )