EtherealN

Matt did that, I believe. :) Anyway, yes, what's there is almost all as in the real thing. The devil is, however, in the details. As for what the USAF thinks about it - they approved it and it's design. They had their requirements for what needed to be removed (and while some might be able to guess - and in a few cases knows fully, since there are actual A-10 maintainers/former pilots etcetera around - what is wrong, those that know won't talk, because they like the not-being-in-jail thing. :P ) One of the "details" though is that "A-10C" is not a static thing. Think like "F-16C". When you look at the aircraft closer, there's things called "Blocks", "MLU"'s etc etc. Suites. So on. So even the things that WERE cleared to be exactly "copied" into the consumer version might not be the same in todays operational jets, even though they're still "A-10C". As for which things might be lagging behind in that sense? I have no clue. I could make some semi-educated guesses, but just in case they would be correct I won't. :P

Minor note as well: you don't strictly have to download separate installers. The standalone installer will, assuming you have a DCS account (for example through multiplayer - MP and the ED store uses the same account server), notice that you have licenses for X Y and Z modules and offer to install them for you. (It will also perform automatic updates when patches or new versions are released.)

I have removed your account logins from your post. You should keep such information away from public eyes. ;) What exactly is your question?

You do not require your credit/debit account to be in the currency you are ordering in. If you have an account in currency X, but purchase in currency Y, your bank will perform the conversion automatically.

When you say underlined links, do you mean like this: A link. Links being underlined has been the standard internet way to indicate a hyperlink since the World Wide Web was invented, pretty much. I do agree with you regarding the listing of forum sections, though. I'll see if I can bribe someone into changing that. :P

Regarding IMC, it's essentially the same deal between AMD and Intel now. At least from Sandy Bridge the MC has been integrated on the CPU. I don't recall for sure about Nehalem though. So yes, definitely worth a shot to try voltage tweaks if necessary, but obviously I'd recommend first checking a guide or two if one does it the first time. (Same as with OCing processors - it's not really that hard to do, but always good to spend a bit checking out how it's done.) (The example I mentioned myself having gone through was a C2D rig, so MC was on northbridge and such tweaks were not an option.)

Was guessing it had to be. I was on the official product page but couldn't find it though. Might just have been me overlooking something obvious while working on other things (sometimes you get table-blind :P ).

If you get them to work at 1333, that's fine IMO though. The performance delta in that regime for DCS is negligible - what I've found was single-digit framerate percentage delta, which is within the uncertainty of the tests themselves. So if you get yout 1600MHz DIMMs to work at 1333, don't worry about it. At most, the performance loss from the reduced clock in DCS should be where it is not humanly detectable - but the performance gained from the higher capacity should be.

Straight-and-land, I suspect a certain someone "trimmed" the "trim" before taking the picture. :)

Correct, coupons are only valid for "fullprice" purchases. We are aware that this can sometimes cause funky coincidenses during sales, pre-order promotion and so on, and are sorry for the inconvenience this might cause. In this case, the best solution is to hold on to the coupon until the aircraft in question goes "gold" or is otherwise not discounted from the start. Cichlidfan, your statement there is slightly misleading; the linked post states that the relevant coupon is not valid for modules developed by others than ED and BST. (For example MiG-21 by Leatherneck.) As you all understand, it would be unfair (and probably legally untenable given the contracts between ED/TFC and the partner) to punish them financually through reduced revenue for a mistake made by ED and BST. That is the confusion that Matt sought to clear up.

If he has only received one key, then he might be owed another. If he received the P-51D as part of the KS, then yes it does count. EDIT: to clarify 1) KS happens 2) RRG sent out P-51D keys to some (not all) 3) Today Step 2 is the one we are talking about. If the key in question was one received back then, then it counts.

I couldn't easily find the memory QVL for that board (who does NOT have that in the manual? Or was I just blind when I read the manual for theboard?), but there is one thing to recall: sometimes what works on two modules will not work on four. I had that happen on my previous machine: I checked QVL when I first bought it and selected something I knew was compatible (a 2x2 kit). I later had a stick die on me, and decided to replace the whole stack of RAM with new (I had been running OC experiments on the previous RAM, so the remaining stick was likely to die soon anyway). ...however, even though 2x2 with those sticks was supported and worked, I later found that 4x2 was not. Would not pass POST. However, if I removed one stick so that I was running 3x2 - it worked. The fact that your previous scenario had them working when alone (2x4), but not together (4x4), I suspect this might be what's happening. Your computer might be disliking the 4x4 situation specifically, not any specific RAMstick. If you have the QVL on hand, have you checked that 4x4 of those Vengeance sticks are on that list? Because being on there for 2x4 is not necessarily the same as being on there for 4x4. :( (Though admittedly, this is one of those cases where things really should work anyway, but as described I have come to take those QVL lists fairly seriously and, in order to avoid making others go through what I went through - and what you seem to have gone through - I never give memory advice to people that is not supported by a relevant QVL; as long as a QVL is available at all, that is.)

If the P-51 key was received as part of the KS, then yes, it counts.

I agree with Pilotasso - unless you're doing workloads that specifically will use all of those threads, you are better off (performance wise) in games with the cheaper regular Haswells.

Just one problem here: the confirmation that the next "pointy-nose" module is indeed "american" came AFTER the announcement of work being underway on the P-51 and the Legends series, as far as I know. Have you checked your dates? Also, it is a bit unfair to make that comparison regarding releases. ED releases since then are actually not that many - and in the case of the P-51, was already announced prior to that.

Such post. Much constructive. Big lols got locked. :)

To perhaps elaborate: HUDs are collimated to infinity; that is, no matter the range you look at them from, they will display the exact same information relative to the terrain/airspace ahead of you. If you move your head a far way back, in order to relay the correct information relating to what's "on the other side" (ie. real airspace), you'll end up with not all of the HUD symbology being visible. This is as in reality. What you are seeing is not only "as in real aircraft", it is actually "as a HUD must work to be useful at all". To understand it, remember that the HUD is there to make symbols appear exactly on objects you might not see with your own eyes; the "boxes" indicating radar contacts must exactly enclose where the target contact actually really is. If it didn't do that, you might as well not have a HUD and just use the normal radar scope. (Or, for gunfire, regular crosshair.) Some further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collimation

He was asking about real life. That's why this was posted in the Reality subsection Military and Aviation. ;)

Your radar would, in this instance, probably be in STT (at least in the game). So yes, there will be lots of noises and blinkenlights going on in the opposing cabin. However, of course, note that it's not the AIM-9 "targeting" that sets it off. It's the fact that your radar just STT'd the guy. Same as if STT'ing someone prior to a "normal" launch.

Careful there Einstein. ;) Ek = ½mv² You don't use c, being the speed of light, for Kinetic energy calculation, that's for calculating the total rest energy of an object with mass. :)

Might be useful to double-check that everyone is talking about the same kind of intercept though: what happens if a foreign military aircraft is inside your airspace might well be different to what might happen if you're just heading out there to keep a really close eye on him. (Like all those famous shots of western aircraft flying on the wing of a russian bomber etc.) Things are a bit different when you want to tell someone to "GTFO NOW" and when you're intercepting them just to keep an eye on them. (The described incident with the Blackbird was, for example, a case of violated airspace, but not all intercepts are like that; indeed I'd suspect they are fairly rare since you would normally head out there prior to the bogey entering your airspace. And it is, of course, a bit shady to threaten someone with a shootdown for flying in international airspace. :P )

Actually, the "depends" and "mostly" are, I feel, a bit misleading here. Because we need to define "radar lock". STT? Eff no. Well, unless your aircraft are such that that (or similarly signatured) locks are your only method of tracking a given target. Basically, it's threatening. You want to avoid that if necessary, since theopposing side might misunderstand. (I have a mate at my flying club, closing on his 100's, that fired on german fighters in WW2 because he had no radio contact with home, the fighter did "interesting" things, and he didn't know if war had broken out between sweden and germany...) Fortunately, most aircraft of some "modern" description have modes similar to what in FC-speak would be "TWS" - track-while-scan - that is not identifiable. In that mode, yes, you would probably "lock" the target, but he wouldn't have a clue that this has happened. (Well, maybe he will, he might have some fancy systems onboard to analyse signals we humans don't know about.) In the STT sense, when Swedish JA-37's intercepted, and gained a (momentary) valid weapons solution on american blackbird jets violating swedish airspace, they would enter STT and give a clear "lock" signal onboar the blackbird's RWR systems. However, they would not have their radar in "war mode", meaning that whatever signals intelligence the blackbird might get from analysing said radar signals would NOT be what the "intercepting" (kinda funny to use that word with a JA-37 "intercepting" a blackbird, but you know what I mean) aircraft would use in actual war. (Different modes were reserved for actual war, and activation of it was very heavily restricted specifically to limit what foreign powers could do to prepare through SIGINT.)

Actually, yes - Admin privs gives access to everything on the machine. (Which is why you should avoid it in general use.) It is an interesting point though, I'll ask around if there is any avenue to change how that works or easy ways to avoid the problem.

Please file a support ticket. http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/

I am so tempted to say something about Avast... Anyway, false positive. Again. Avast does this every two-three updates or so.