MrYenko

It'll also make anything more than 1v1 COMPLETELY confusing. :helpsmilie:

The forumz would asplode.:lol:

I run the G940, with FF off in sim. It causes issues with the trim controls. :(

Keep in mind that just about every load you'll fly with is asymetric. The targeting pod, jammer, and the two AIM-9s are pretty much the base load, so you're starting all out of whack, and adding weight from there. :joystick:

http://www.gamingshogun.com/Article/8965/DCS__A-10C_Warthog_Review_-_PC.html Excerpt: :pilotfly:

http://upload.youtube.com/my_videos_upload Go. Nao.

Ya... Self shadowing in FSX brings even my machine to its knees with everything cranked up. Of course, FSX is quite possibly the least resource-efficient 3D engine I have ever seen, so I don't know where the benchmark goes, precisely. :dunno:

Particularly flying into a setting sun... :P

:D Many thanks to WarriorX for his mission data card, Eddie for the 9line card, and the 25th VFS for their checklists. Thanks guys :thumbup:

They're gonna get me for ANOTHER $60? :joystick:

"F/O's ILS pitch crossbar will not move from stowed position." "Cleaned cannon-plug connections with electrical contact cleaner, IAW DC-10 MM 24-00-00, ops check good." Translation: I re-racked the box downstairs with a FURIOUS VENGEANCE, and sprayed the back with canned air.

Non-technical people would probably be amazed how often solutions like that actually work... :thumbup:

I know, Im just saying that youre simulating the overall squawk rate with complete failures... Its a bit much. :P

I'd bet a doughnut that your MTBF data is based on logbook entries or work cards for non-routine maintenance, and not on complete system failures, as are modeled in the sim... :joystick: Just because the system is un-airworthy doesn't mean its completely ka-putt.

This. I do find it tough to pick the targets out much past 4nm, though, even with the seeker set to narrow FOV. Its a tad easier with 65Ds, due to backround contrast, but still rough. The stories of pilots during the '91 gulf war using their mavericks as poor-man's targeting pods became a LOT more impressive to me once I was disabused of the idea that Mavericks can actually get a good lock out to their theoretical 17nm max range...

I don't want them anywhere near my A-10... They can't even find the engine in that 911...

TACANs are more closely related to VORs. In fact, a large number of civilian VORs are co-located with military TACANs, with the resulting navigational aid known as a VORTAC, and bears a different icon on navigation charts. That being said, NDBs are a completely different, and older technology. Non Directional Beacons emit the same signal in every direction, whilst VOR/TACAN beacons emit a signal that allows aircraft with the proper equipment to identify exactly what bearing they are to/from the station, and the slant range to the beacon. (DME, or Distance Measuring Equipment.) Some light reading can of course be found on wikipedia. ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-directional_beacon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHF_omnidirectional_range http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_landing_system The last one includes a list of TACAN code to ILS frequency conversions, which is pretty cool. Also, runway numbers are always magnetic headings, until you get to the extreme northern or southern latitudes, when runways are numbered with true headings due to large magnetic variations. The airport diagram chart will generally have both magnetic and true headings on it.

Game boxes are a thing of the past. I came to grips with that in ~2005, and haven't looked back. :thumbup:

The first step being: "Stare at it and wonder what the hell you're going to do, whilst simultaneously cursing the entire extended family of the idiotic ramp rat who backed a $30m jet fighter into the mud." Been there. Had a tug driver shove the upper vertical stab and #2 engine tailcone of one of "my" DC-10s through a hangar wall, because he wasn't paying attention, and thought he was running over a chock... Its funnier now, years later.

Bingo. New engines for the hawg would increase capability far more than the ability to fling mini-mavericks around.

:)

The real question is; What do the NorKs want, and are they wanting it because they want it, or because the ChiComs told them to?

Nevada was yanked from Beta3. Any mission set there will fail.

ANY game thrives on low latency for a good multi-player experience. The data transfer rates for games are relatively low, (5-25kb/s for say, an FPS) but the ping times are critical to a smooth experience. Good multi-player coding can make the software able to conceal slightly higher ping times, but once you start to exceed ~200ms, even the best netcode is going to start to show the effects.

If you're in the US, call around to your local Best Buys for a copy of Lock-On Platinum. It's both LOMAC and FC2 in one box, and its like $20. :smilewink: