pyates2104

It was an outflow valve that was left open in the manual position after ground maintenance. The flight crew should have checked it and didn't. (allegedly) http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/All/F15FBD7320037284C2257204002B6243/$file/FINAL%20REPORT%205B-DBY.pdf

The new Nimrod project has been a disaster from the start. It's laterally a "the wings don't fit scenario" caused by bad project management, incompetent procurement and a bias toward UK suppliers. If you want to piss money against the wall for no outcome, then this was the project for you. (A bit like the Nimrod AEW project that got canned). The economic truths are harsh. Large projects had to be cut, projects that would cost more to cut than to keep had to be continued (Aircraft carriers) The Nimrod was coming to the end of it's usable life span. Job losses are inevitable during defense cuts, nothing is forever any more. If you think there are better ways to cut the sums of money needed, why don't you suggest them? I for one think the approach was balanced and well thought out.

Yes.. Ummmm, well somethings up...and it doesn't appear to be your basic system setup or background processes. ATI driver would seem to be a good candidate, but as reported, other people are using new ATI drivers with no problems. I'd still swap over the card back to the old nvidia and see if that makes a difference. After that, your looking at running perfmon in the background while running DCS to see if you can identify the bottleneck. (Note that perfmon will have an overhead and affect the counters, don't enable all of them, just the ones you need.) Good article on how to use perfmon: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/securitytools/archive/2009/11/04/how-to-use-perfmon-in-windows-7.aspx

seems strange that your seeing a slide show on your new rig with that spec. Questions: What are your old system specs? How much USABLE memory is windows reporting. Is your CPU running at 3.2 Ghz or is that what it SHOULD run out of the box? Whats your Windows performance score? What bloatware have you got installed? What Virus protection are you running? Whats your CPU usage when nothing (that you know off) is running. There are so many things that can have a negative impact on performance, the main one's are to do with incorrect system config (CPU clock speeds, RAM config) and stuff running In the background hogging CPU and memory (Norton antivirus etc).

My silly mistake, I'm mixing my acronyms (MMA's) :cry:

It does, not on an a10 though TAWS /TCAS II

Pixel, It's the slant range that counts. It really depends on how high you are, at lower altitudes the laser range will be up to a maximum of 10 km. If you don't lase, you can get a mark point at far greater range but it will based on LOS (Line of sight) and will not be as accurate. Frederf, Yes, but.... as I said, it will not be as accurate. The more oblique the angle, the less accurate the mark point. I've been fiddling with this scenario for the last few days, this is what I've determined. 1. If you get a good range using the laser range finder (usually inside 10 km) this is by far the most accurate method of marking targets. 2. If you want to mark outside of 10Km, you will not be able to use the Laser, The mark point is based on a LOS calculation and will usually be behind the target. It's best to select area mode and mark just in front of the target, this is in effect, you compensating for the LOS deviation.

This WAS in Nevada, I'm thinking it was the slant range and angle 20KM + that was causing the inaccuracy.

JDAM multiple Thats it! Eureka! I thought this was a bug at first, I stand corrected. Method: (Ish) 1. Laser in latch mode 2. Acquire Target in TDC (Range is about 25 Km at this point) (Point or area mode) 3. Laser on 4. TMS forward long to set as SPI 5. TMS right short to set as mark point. The mark point is NOT the SPI its a point in the air set as you set the mark point. If you carry out the same procedure as above but omit steps 1 and 3 (Latch and laser on) the mark point is set correctly. Problem is, using this method at this range, your mark point is usually off by at lease 20 feet. So am I correct in saying that you wont get a good SPI inertial point unless your within about 10 km of the target?

I have exactly the same problem as you. Basically the TMS right short is marking the points as if you were pressing the mark button on the CDU and not marking them as offset. I spent 3 hours last night going over the video and trying to figure out what I have missed. Is everyone sure this is not an issue introduced by beta 2? Or am I being strangely dumb?

Just press the button for longer. Problem solved

It must know I'm an Ace then... and punish me for every small indiscretion.

If you fly into a power cable, the cable sparks and there's a small explosion. I hasten to add.... I did this on purpose and don't normally fly into power cables.....

Cross controls - Departure ...or lack theroff.. 1. Thrust at flight idle from 140 Knots 2. Full left rudder 3. Right Aileron until aircraft roll is 0 (Almost full right stick) The speed decays until 35 knots - No stall, no departure, -1300 (ish) fpm. Stays at 35 knots with steady descent. This behavior seems very strange....

I'm having exactly the same problem, anybody have a workaround?

Not if you knew who just fixed it......you'd probably feel safer on the ground.:pilotfly:

Running an i5 750 at 3.8 stable, performance is a lot better than running at 2.66 stock speed. i5 750 is very easy to OC providing you have a good MB bios and good cooling.

It works for me.... but one additional note, push forward THEN pull collective, not the other way round.

FSX has wing flex, flight modeling is suspect though.

Forgive me if I'm wrong (and I am frequently) but don't A10's have a very rigid wing structure? that doesn't deflect much anyway?

It's only new terrain guys..... looks good thought. At the end of the day it's very sandy, you'll soon get bored of it and hark for some trees and lakes. Visual ref points are a bit lacking too...easy to get lost. Hope we get lots of old plane wrecks and proper ranges, any chance?:music_whistling:

I agree, If they release it on steam I'm out. I've had nothing but bad experiences with steam enabled games and will never buy a product that uses it again!

If you get stuck in VRS, Max out the collective (Pull hard) and push the nose forward. If you have enough height, you'll make it. Just remember not to max out the collective for too long or you'll loose rotor RPM and die!

So theres no engine bleed air cross feed? Does that mean relight is ether using windmill or APU?

Mission editor Most of my wishes would be todo with the editor interface: Ability to show Sat, contour data in editor map (detailed 3d map placement for units would be cool) Ability to show unit description/model when selecting and inserting units Ability to use dissimilar aircraft types in Units (easer for escort creation etc Ability to create a FARP template! (Include static objects in Units) Theres also a lot of stuff I don't like about the AI used by units, but I can't easily quantify this, it would probably require a lot of work to implement, you could be argue that this would be a project in itself...... so its probably not going to happen. Overall, the sim has an acceptable balance of good flight models, semi-realistic systems modeling and battlefield AI. Nothing else out there comes close, but there will always be room for improvement.