bfeld

Great work, miguez, downloaded the 720p version yesterday without any problems. It is by far more than I expected from the sample training lesson, I was really surprised to not only see a video, but also additional material like a map, mission file etc. :thumbup: Very professional appearance, I'm really looking forward to the other lessons. There's exactly all this little information I'm interested in, as you said: I'm not only interested in how it works, but why and much more important, how to do it correctly! Can't wait to finish work today and start... well... working ;) Cheers, smurfer

Credits will go to Chezz_BMF You might want to check out more of them :) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=53395

Now danny777, looking at your other 'whitespaced' image lyrics, here's another tough answer, citing an old classic: "Space... man, I always wanted you to go..." :music_whistling: ;)

It should be mainly a hardware limitation, since systems like EyeFinity pretend to be one big screen. IIRC EyeFinity is limited to 8k X 8k pixels. So if at all, it might be some other limitation concerning resolution (or the number of viewports, if you want to wrap around), not number of screens.

Wow, now I'm really overwhelmed! I read this thread and c0ff's explanations with great interest. Yesterday, my LOMAC copy arrived and I installed FC2 to experience the new sound engine. Maybe, if you don't listen carefully, there's not much difference, but with the knowledge given by this thread I couldn't get enough of the new effects. Damping of higher frequencies with growing distance is one thing, but there are two effects, that I really enjoyed: Speed of sound: Flyby with supersonic speed. You hear nothing until the aircraft passes... then rumbling thunder dominates the scene. Finally, something that was always confusing me, was 'fixed' (though it's hard to speak of 'realism' and 'to fix' in this case): Frequency of sound scales with time scale. Hence, you'll get lower frequencies in slow-motion, higher in fast motion, respectively. Well done, c0ff (and others involved) :thumbup:

Might be a problem of UAC in Windows?! I think I heard of this problem. Perhaps it's located in your local documents directory or you have to disable UAC. Just a hint, I'm not quite sure though.

Thanks for this little story. I've never flown any real aircraft myself, so I cannot really judge about the realism in your products, although it feels very plausible for me. Reading that these pilots are able to use their skills and tactics within the simulation with success to a certain degree, supports my opinion. I always like to read those things about people, that actually have a clue about what they are doing -- unlike me ;).

Feuerfalke, don't you know this "Alien vs Predator" simulation? Almost every wise country prepares their military for the future, when the fight against the most deadliest creatures in space will start (although there are at minimum 3 years between their game modules). ;) Cheers, Torsten

Hi, I think it's possible to keep it compatible for a long time, which doesn't mean that all aircraft modules will be up-to-date. It all depends on the interface between world simulation and aircraft. As mobias and others already stated: ED has probably been planning in a very forward-looking manner. So with every new module, the updated (or even recreated) world simulation might be just plugged in (of course it's not as easy as it sounds) for old modules, as long as the interface stays the same. However, simulation detail of older aircraft might sooner or later seem a little outdated compared to new aircraft. Cheers, bfeld

First: Congratulations ED! :) I have a question concerning the flight model and the physics simulation in general: I started with DCS: Black Shark. Now reading the online feature documentation of Flaming Cliffs, it seems as if the Su-25T has a better flight model than the other planes. Also, the simulation of engine/turbine and hydraulics for the Su-25T systems seem to be a (similar/basic) version of that used in Black Shark. Is this general assumption (for FC2.0 still) true, is the Su25T the most realistic plane, concerning Flight model and system physics? Cheers, bfeld

Well, it'll (still) be kind of an addon if (or more positively: when) it's compatible with the new FC2 -- crazy vicious circle ;)

Hello c0ff, talking about the new sound engine: is this the one already present in DCS: Black Shark? I'm always a little confused when reading about new features of the engine. Is the simulation engine of FC2 a newer version than that used in DCS: Black Shark? Bye bfeld

I thought for the autopilot channel ALT-HOLD you have to select the source, not 100% sure though. Maybe the switch is just to force barometric sensor below 300m?!

You should use the radar altimeter (RAlt), it works from 0 to 300 meter above ground. If using ALT-HOLD, the autopilot must then use radar altimeter, too. Use LCtrl-X to toggle between barometric and radar altimeter. The radar altimeter is located left to the IAS gauge and above rotor RPM gauge. If it exceeds 300m, you will see a red flag. In the HUD, a suffix 'p' shows that the RAlt is used.

Hey Boulund, yes and no :). Moiré patterns are caused by aliasing. Aliasing is not only those jagged lines. If you have a digital (discrete) signal, like an image, it is just sampling of the real (continuous) image. The jagged lines, you mentioned, are just sampling points of a real line, that is defined by the continuous world or a mathematical formula, if synthetically rendered. Image signals consist of different frequencies as audio signals do. If your sample rate is too low (Shannons therorem: you must have at least a sampling frequency, that is twice as high as the highest signal frequency you want to catch), you will get false frequencies. Depending on the input signal, they might manifest as jagged lines or Moiré patterns. One kind of anti-alising uses supersampling -- a higher resolution. That means, the sample rate/frequency is higher, which reduces aliasing. Another method is to low pass filter the input signal, that would be bi-/trilinear and anisotropic filtering for example. The low pass filter cuts the higher frequencies of your signal, hence, your sample rate (image resolution) can be lower, without having too much aliasing. Since perfect edges (rectangular signals) are a combination of all frequencies (ranging to infinity), you will never be able to sample them without errors, you would need an infinite resolution.

You don't seem to have Anti-Aliasing on, try to turn it on. Should be better then, what you experience is Aliasing. These patterns are caused by the the horizontal line texture on the Shkval, that simulates kind of interlacing I guess. When zoomed out and not filtered, the many details of the structure cause artificial patterns like your ellipses. Filtering (like Anti-Aliasing) prevents this. You could probably also reduce this effect by using a lower resolution for cockpit textures (Shkval and ABRIS).

So Skywalker is not your last name?! Damn, I thought I know your father ;) Okay, on-topic: I used to land hovering, but thanks to this thread, I'm trying to land in different ways to improve my overall flying skills.

Sorry for going off topic, but I remember how proud I was, having a memory card that resulted in 1 MB chip memory and 1,5 MB fast memory. A friend of mine had the "fat agnus" and could only use 2,3 MB while I already had the "big agnus" memory controller :megalol: And then playing the one and only Interceptor... :joystick:

So then, what's the difference, if you use a FF joystick? Does the joystick actually set its center to the trimmed position or is there a third trimmer implementation, that does not assume the stick to be centered in case it's a FF joystick? That's why I asked about a configuration which pretends using FF. The best for this mod would be a trimmer implementation that does everything apart from the virtual centering. So feed the autopilots, but use the actual joystick position. p.s.: As said before by others: great mod, just wondering about trimming.

When I was reading this thread I was just thinking about this. In both trimming modes the stick is supposed to be centered after trimming (whether forced after some time period, or when it's user-centered). So with the old implementation, one would accumulate input when not centering, with the new implementation, control input will not be accepted. How do you cope with this? Is it possible in some configuration to just pretend having FF? Bye, bfeld

Hi, there is the ALT HOLD (LShift-A), which is the fourth button of the four green autopilot channels on the right. PITCH, BANK and HEADING HOLD are the others that can be turned on/off there. Note, that the height is measured by radar (<=300m) or barometric (>300m). You have to tell the autopilot which one to use (LCtrl-X). It should keep your height within it's limits (i.e. smooth turns etc.), you set height when releasing the collective break ('F' - key). Nevertheless, your control input is priorised, sharp manoeuvres won't be fully compensated. Bye bfeld

Hi there, TrackIR: TrackIR 4 here, for me, it was the biggest improvement concerning immersion and comfort in the pit. HOTAS: I had a Saitek X52 pro and I really liked it. Unfortunatelly, there was a little problem with the stick, so I had to send it back. I was thinking about buying another HOTAS in case I don't get a new one but the money. I was researching a little, but finally ordered a new X52 pro, since it's a good cost/performance ratio. Rudder pedals: Saitek pedals, I don't know the others, just ordered them with the second stick. I think they're great. Multi-Monitor: Don't have much experience with that. I tried a second screen for ABRIS and Shkval yesterday, it was nice, but somehow felt unrealistic, since it is not in it's usual place between gauges and switches. I think it's not enjoyable without head tracking and HOTAS, so at least these should be bought. Bye, bfeld

Hello, reading some similar threads concerning this topic I think some of the posters aim at failures other than those in the mission editor. I think system checking is a good example, as I wrote in another thread. When I do the startup, I do the full startup. But checking the indication lamps is always a little weird, knowing that no lamp will ever fail. Of course it might be frustrating but on the other hand, I would really like to decide whether to start with the broken lamp or to get a new helo. Even if the probabilty of a lamp failure would be low (like 1.0e-9 or less), it would give me a better feeling when checking the lamps :) Bye, bfeld

Hi, I started a similar thread some time ago. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=43768 Back then, I couldn't manage to break the engines without anti-ice in icy conditions, but that problem was solved ;) . Another important part for me was the system checking prior to start. I would love to see an indication lamp fail when checking them (or at least to know that it could happen). Otherwise, I get lazy and do not check lamps, since broken indication lamps are not modelled. Bye, bfeld

Hi, maybe it's related to the problem in this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=41480 After trying nearly everything as described there, I ordered a new one and it just works :)