dawgie79

In VR you can. Don't know about pancake but I guess not. See Stingers vid, Jar walked around in VR. :)

Radio - Ground crew - request launch. I think.

Invalid PW and it asks for all the license serials.

If not now, it will be possible to disable the overlay in the future.

I rather have updated textures like ED did with the warplanes and the KA50 & A10C. :)

First of all, I'm like you. Never served or have any experience with any type of weapon except kitchen knives. ;) That said, if somebody can help you better than I can, by all means. Mk-82/83/84: Freefall bombs used for all sorts of things. Think small buildings/compounds, vehicles, parked aircraft, other (small) infrastructure such as bridges. There are variants which have fins or a small dragchute deployed when you drop them, this is called retarded, used when there's a lot of anti-air around or when for some other reason you need to ingress at low altitudes. Whereas 82 is a 500lbs explosive, 83 1000, 84 2000. Zuni/2.75"/5": small rockets used on vehicles. Lau is the rack they're on if I'm not mistaken. CBU-99/Mk-20 Cluster bombs. Bomb that bursts open at a given altitude (which you can set), it then releases quite a few smaller bomblets which have small dragchutes, so they can cover a big surface, depending on the burst-altitude you've set. Not as precise though. Used for small, non-armored (I think) vehicles or runway's. GBU-31/32/38 JDAM: Same as Mk-82/83/84 but equipped with GPS/INS. Fire and forget, can be designated through TGP or GPS coordinates. GBU-10/12/16 LGB: Same as Mk-82/83/84 but equipped with laserguidance. Can be designated through TGP with lasing, or a JTAC/FAC. AGM-65E/F Maverick: Air to ground guided missile for relatively small targets such as (moving) armored vehicles or small ships. Don't know for sure if you can use them on infrastructure though. The E-variant is laserguided and can be used with TGP with lasing, or a JTAC/FAC. F-variant has an infrared seeker. AGM-88C HARM: Missile used to take out radarinstallations, so for SEAD/DEAD operations. AGM-154A/C JSOW: Long-range GPS/INS guided standoff weapon. Fire from a long distance to a predesignated point (or a given point if you have the GPS-coordinates) and forget. Used against heavily defended targets. AGM-84D Harpoon: Air-to-ship missile used to take out ships. Walleye: Man-in-the-middle weapon. Sort of the father of the AGM-65 Mavericks I guess. Old very heavy bomb with a tv-camera which can be guided to it's target mid-flight, hence the "man-in-the-middle". AGM-84E SLAM: Don't know for sure, I think it's a man-in-the-middle (through infrared) cruise missile used for static high-profile targets. Standoff Land Attack Missile, GPS guided. AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER: Same as SLAM except it can also attack ships. Mid to long range, GPS guided. Hope this helps. :)

The consumer. First they keep asking for dates, so ED gives dates with the disclaimer "subject to change". Then, when dates change, the whining starts from the same people who were asking for the dates in the first place.

Maybe ED can put it in a special bundle with the SU-33 for the Reds among us.

So basically what you're saying is this new ball on the Supercarrier is modeled better than the one on the old Stennis. You can see that ball from every angle. :)

Nice! 4th of july new movie easter egg or what (@2:29)? :P

Great post, thanks a lot!

I'm a nitpick probably, but I also don't like Spudknocker anymore, ever since I found out he lied about being a pilot. I just can't watch that. Same with GR, the vids with the Supercarrier are an ADHD mess. I guess I like Growling_Sidewinder, RedKite and Jabbers the most, their style and they are calm and relax, soft voice, clear explanations, etc. But best of all still is Wags. Nobody can beat his tutorials, imo. Wags rules. :smartass:

Unwatchable for me, turned the first one off after a few minutes. Too much ADHD, jumping around the view, the guy shouting throughout the whole thing, it's a mess. Ugh.

Like this:

Well, when the zombie-apocalypse hits, I sure as hell gonna try and fly away if I find me a helo. :joystick:

As few as possible startup apps running, as well as apps that run in the background (on the taskbar next to the clock, all those icons from apps, remove them and do it so they won't automatically start anymore when booting Windows). Turn off as many services as you can (in Explorer right-click This PC, choose Manage, then in the Computer Management window, select Services & Applications, there you can switch services on and off), some will use much of your systems resources. Disable indexing, at least for the DCS drive.

Yeah, another vid would be nice. :)

Right. Car manufacturers didn't lie about fuel usage of their cars. They didn't cheat on tests and lied to customers. And they went bankrupt after that, right.

Kinda like looking through a scope on a sniper rifle?

VR above TrackIR anytime. Rift S is popular for a not too high a price.

Honestly? No. Here's why. And this will be my last reply about this topic because it's offtopic actually. :) ED has stated in the past that the average WWII warbird takes approx. 1,5-2 years to fully develop. The F/A-18C is a modern fighter jet. In Wags' Hornet EP3 he states the different new systems they had to develop first for this jet and that specific video: Engines Air turbine Starter (ATS) Airframe Mounted Accessory Drive (AMAD) APU Fuel Electrical Hydraulic Flight Control Systems (FCS) Caution & Advisory System Ground Proximity Warning System Built-in Test (BIT) Integrated Fuel & Engine Indicators (IFEI) Fire Test System Bleed Air System INS And then there will be the following systems after that (vid): AA Radar including submodes AG Radar including submodes JHMCS Datalink IFF Different new & advanced weaponry, both AA & AG EW TGP And I'm sure I forgot a bunch. Now, if I take a look on the product page of the Hornet, I can read the following: This tells me ED has taken on a huge task, because they needed to create several new technologies in a way that it's both simulated (not just guesswork) and works as intented, like the real thing. And what? People expect ED to code all this, without bugs, in 1,5 years after the EA release? That's just not realistic. Sure. Maybe ED has had this as a deadline, but given the fact the majority of responses towards ED is negative, I can understand them in wanting to give a deadline in the first place. Even though the task is enormous, and completely new with regards to the tech that needs to be developed. If people would think for a second before blasting of and complain on and on about things not begin finished, they would know the huge and complex task ED has given themselves. That they are trying their best, it's not like Wags, Nick or Kate get up in the morning thinking how they can screw the community that day. I know ED states they thrive on the responses given by the community, and I believe to a certain amount that they do. But nobody, including ED, wants to be criticised on everything they do. It's unreasonable, and not justified. And they don't need to be told how to run their company as well, it's disrespectful. Like I said, they do their best, let's recognise that for a change.

No, why? It is what it is. It'll get finished, maybe a bit later than expected. But hey, life is full of unexpected things. In that regard, every time ED has a message for us, the community, they receive enormous backlash, and for what? For trying their best? Really?

You don't know that. "Most of" is a claim based on nothing but your gutfeeling, i.e. nothing. So again, speak for yourself or don't speak at all. I don't want to be associated with the whining negativity around here. I love ED's products and the fun I have with them.

Sigh. I wish people would just speak for themselves, thank you. I for one couldn't disagree more with you and sentiments like yours.

@Bignewy: understand, thanks for the reply. @Wags: Thanks for the insight. Cheers guys. :)