Haggart

Hey, does anyone know where to get the 1.6-Gauges? I assume they include the UH-1-gauges from ceardarkz? https://github.com/cleardarkz/hawgtouch-gaugepack (or could someone with a working Visualstudio-install compile the gauge pack into the gauge-dll?) If I launch the 1.5 with the demo config while the UH-1-module is running, hawgtouch is crashing, I assume because it does not get the correct data sets...? is that correct? I don't have currently a working A-10 installation to countertest, but I would like to use the instruments for the Huey...

Is the pen mightier then the sword...? (And no, no pun over automatic weapons coming on) I don't see, how the integration of new display effects improve the development speed of terrain development...? What is missing is an terrain sdk ;) but as I dont see this anytime coming, we're doomed to Georgia...

Sure, it IS a great idea. But think of the implications! Europe, modeled in DCS acurracy? Even if you would just like to model the most significant landmarks and fill the rest with autogen, you would need something around 10-20 years. If you look at the time the nevada project took ED (and thats mostly desert!), you could calculate around... 50+ years? We could dream of such an enviroment. But why don't shrink it a bit to something perhaps achievable? Take germany. Every level 3 scenario in the SIOPS included a major NN-war taking place between the Elbe and the Rhine. You could even go on and model real world scenarys thought through in US- and USSR-war plans, and germany is relativly small. But a problem is still: high urban density which would need to be modeled at least to a good portion, and many small airports (which are capable for helicopters, STOL transporters or even small fighter aircraft like the Mig29). The only thing I could imagine would be a Framework which models the terrain accuratly, and then a common repository to which everyone could commit urban modeling.

God, what a beauty. Awwww. <3 Why does there no build schematics exist for an eagle-pit? or does they and I don't know?

Aaaaand because it depends on about 4,5mio different variables if you Java applet is running exactly like it's supposed to be, especially depending on the air pressure over northern alaska and the stepcount of a specific antilope in south africa. Java is sure nice for "normal" things, because you've platform compatibility, but as winz said, the lower you go, the more performance you CAN have - if you have competent dev's, down to the level of machine code assemblers. In Java it's easier to achieve higher base performance because of many automizations done by the VM, code restructorization, etc, and in many cases of bad-shaped code (and most coded java software is just a big mess), the gains of automatic automization are taking over the loss through the translation in the VM. If you do it right and abandon that level, you can however get much greater results, especially in processing-intensive applications like graphics. And because of the natural misshaping of code (because very few programmers actually recognize the necessary beautifulness of code) and necessaty for debugging, performance optimization by measurements in the VM etc, statements like the "C++ dev time is slower" come to surface. It's all about love (to beautiful code, in this case, and knowledge).

In fact, in my opinion X-Plane is the only option to be taken seriously. FSX is 6 years old - not only 6 years dev in graphics (what is not THAT important when you're on FL300), but also in flight model mathemathics and the simulation of that. I'm currently working with Prepar3d (the "modern" variant of FSX built by Lockheed Martin), but it also lacks so many things which which are built into X-Plane, beginning from a correct atmospheric visualization (which is especially important if you wanna fly by "real" sight cons), to the need to attach everything out of the simulator core by extra software (FSUIPC) for data export, where X-Plane offers many API's, plugins, etc from stock. Only problem is that X-Plane 10 uses up a hell of performance. If you're going lower than an ATI 7xxx-GPU, expect to have to set the visual settings in the lower midrange, especially since it doesn't support SLI/Crossfire.

Hey all, I'm seeing no other thread about this: as FSX is often mentioned, but now 6 years old, and the only simulation which continious to be developed is Prepar3d, I wanted to advise that there's now the possibility to buy an academic license of Prepar3d for only 49$. Have a look: http://www.prepar3d.com/prepar3d-academic/ The only "limitation" seems to be a little watermark displayed in the upper right of the sim, and it's available for everyone "at or below the undergraduate level" (?). Perhaps this is of use for some of us as many people are still flying FSX?

I... thought so? You sound shocked, whats wrong about that?

I love your both - I'll try that <3

Yes and no - Alt + F1 is great, but it still has an HUD? Or am I too stupid to disable that?

Hey, I know, I've been bragging about this in at least two more threads, but because there's no clarity or ideas, I'm trying to point it out as a direct wish for FC3: The possibility to completly disable the cockpitrendering. This should be fairly simple to do, as all you need would be complete transparent textures in my opinion; however, for larger systems with a real cockpit built, flying around with another VIRTUAL cockpit is... "not beautiful enough"? ;) Could that be possible or become part of the Features-list of FC3? (:

Hey Gadroc, nice, but I don't know any C#-programming and I don't think my boss would like to invest money in something he don't know if he wanna use it later on :/ but as you (and metalnwood) say - FSUIPC would be a standard, I think, so we can get it working for everything supporting that standard (like XPUIPC and LOIPC)?

At the moment, I'll have to evaluate first how to get LOMAC without a cockpit working (as no one seems to know anything about that, it seems like a difficult task?) - if I'm over that step, I'll contact you about helios. But a second question to helios - is interfacing with FSX possible? I don't find any information over in the helios forums about that... And I'ld like to get away from Magenta, no matter if it's LOMAC or FSX.

Hey, sorry, last days were stressful (many events). I looked e bit into LOSIOC and I think, that (in combination with Helios/or else) would be a good solution. Also, we decided that in the moment, a full-usable cockpit would be nice, but too much for most people who just want the flying-thing. So, there's still one main problem: how to display LOMAC without a cockpit? Perhaps someone with knowledge in 3d-cockpitworks could produce a simple full-transparent pit for the F15? Anyone who could assist with that or has other ideas? Perhaps we could get a concept working from this for LOMAC-pit-builders.

Nope, would have to register prior... but thanks for the description, so I don't need this (: