Kaiza

They may be out of coverage. I tried to replay a low level nav I did the other day and it lost me once I descended below 500'.

For non-US flights it only tracks aircraft with Mode-S out (with extended squitter I believe). Mode S is essentially a data link which can be used between aircraft (for things such as TCAS) as well as from aircraft to ground stations. Only relatively modern automated flight decks have such technology which is why you will not see some flights. In years to come aircraft will all have Mode-S and there is talk of doing away with primary RADAR completely. Some military aircraft are fitted with Mode S, but normally turn it off when tactical because of sites like this.

An ATIS would be great. RADAR/tower/ground on different freqs Taxi instructions via taxiway names (prob dreaming with this) Joins via initial Traffic info "Change tactical" calls when clear of airspace

Sounds great. Sounds like we may be able to implement an ATIS in missions :)

Thanks!

From the manual page 194: SYSTEM / INS / UPDATE UPDATE Page Branch Line Select Key, R5. Allows the selection and display of the UPDATE Page. This page allows you to select a waypoint and provide an overhead INS update when flying over it. The basic procedure is to select a waypoint in the fly-to database, press the PROCEED LSK, overfly the waypoint's known location (such as a prominent landmark) and press the MK (markpoint) button on the CDU. You can then choose to accept or reject the INS update data. It doesn't really work because there is no INU drift/schuler cycle modelled in the sim, and therefore your inertial position will never need updating. I am not sure whether deselecting your GPS and then updating to an incorrect position will affect your nav solution, I have never tried (ie whether updating to a point 5NM west of the waypoint will shift everything west 5NM).

Do you mean in flaming cliffs a-10a? If so then no, as this level of detail is not going to be modeled unless it gets the full DCS makeover. I don't think that is the intent of these FC modules. Functions such as this really need a clickable cockpit so you can enter lat/longs and preplanned update points into the INS. It is a feature (INU drift) that has been requested a few times for BS and A-10C though and I would have to agree, it would be quite fun for those modules (provided some way to implement GPS jamming was available also of course).

Roger that. Any update avail on CA integration Headspace, or has the effort been on the SDK recently?

The officer ranks are a little different to that pic. There is a light grey between each stripe in the RNZAF (something which always confuses visiting countries). Also the NEW ZEALAND is in black on the rank slides and the slide itself is a much lighter blue. This picture here shows the grey behind each stripe, but even this isn't quite correct as the grey only appears between stripes not on the outer edges. http://www.airforce.mil.nz/about-us/who-we-are/rnzaf-ranks.htm

Also try pushing it all the forward and then back to idle

Personally I think that yes the A-10C is, and will remain, the holy grail for quite some time (at least for serving military combat aircaft). Unless ED or a 3rd party pick up another military contract it will be very difficult to match that level. For one- fidelity level is an exponential curve of effort. The last 10% is very hard to achieve and will only be appreciated by a minuscule amount of customers (unless they are a military customer) so there isn't much point if the module is made for the public. Dont get me wrong, i am sure the f-18 will be fantastic, but ED would be mad to sink money into modelling features that the consumer will not notice. Second, it is extremely difficult to develop something accurately without having a serving military operator to test and answer questions constantly at your disposal.

If you want high end then yep the Warthog is the way to go. Value for money though, I have to agree with TimeKilla, the x52 pro is great. In my opinion it is hard to justify all that extra cash for a WH when you compare the two.

From the world splash screen select "mission", then from the drop down menu select the combined arms folder, then select the mission you would like.

Use DMS right/left with HUD as SOI to choose aircraft wing span for the funnel lead solution. Have a funny feeling this may not be very clear in the manual. EDIT: Disregard last, explains it on page 576.

I am not quite sure what you are saying here, and forgive me if I am stating the obvious as I don't know your background, but if there is a co-located DME with an ILS, it will make no difference- you should NOT get the DME distance when you dial up the freq in an A-10C as DME not fitted to the aircraft (I dont know what the game does as my 1.2.5 is fubar, but I suspect it may be modelled incorrectly by having a quick look on youtube). Just because you have an ILS receiver on board an aircraft does not mean you get DME. You have to have a DME box which the A-10C does not. The first give away is there is no 'DME' on the audio panel, + the only reference to DME in the -1 is with respect to TACAN (which as you know you can configure to receive DME). Only aircraft with a DME will display distance when you dial up an ILS freq with a co-located DME. If DCS:A-10C does, it is a bug. If modelled correctly the only way to get distance from a co-located ILS/DME would be to dial up the ILS DME freq in the TACAN box. This may sound strange and confusing to people who have operated IFR in the civi world which have boxes that normally receive both DME and ILS signals when you tune a freq, however this is strangely enough how it works in many military a/c. Forgive me if I have misunderstood your post and gone way off track here, but this is a very common misconception. (Some people may have seen spring tensioned metal flaps under the glare sheilds in some military aircraft. These normally contain tables of comm pre-set freqs and are at times also used for tables that translate DME to TACAN freqs for this reason.)

I was taught that the bearing needle reversal is primary reference for station passage, however at high altitude DME can be referenced for a large cone. Although where I live there aren't many TACANs, so if I am using one for nav I am normally going there rather than passing over! Something some people may not be aware of is that most military aircraft of the a-10 era didn't not have a DME box at all, instead you would have to use the equivalent TACAN channel for DME. So for example, when you are on vectors for an ILS you would have the TACAN up for SA. Then on the base turn you would change the TACAN channel to the ILS freq and use the TACAN distance for your ILS. Tuning an ILS will only give LOC and GS. I am haven't tried this on the a-10, so I am not sure if ED simulate it or not. Here is how you convert a DME freq to a TACAN channel: http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-85688.html

Nice work mate, looks great.

^^ This. Very annoying indeed. Not sure about the A-10, however I have flown several aircraft with TACAN and they all had/have a TO/FROM flag. Whether you have DME or not isn't really much of a factor as the primary reference for station direction is the bearing needle rather than TO/FROM which is more for additional SA.

Haven't tried with the Huey (are you sure you have enabled it in mission editor?), but can answer your TARS question. TARS will only work with CA if you are sitting in an aircraft. If you are just occupying a commander slot and not in any aircraft, then no it will not work. As I understand it, Headspace is working on having this functionality, however it has not been released yet.

Well now that you are married you won't be getting any anymore so you might as well play a-10...

Very cool

Come join the circus aussieboy!

I am not sure why people are getting so wound up about ED not supporting this? What evidense is there that they are not already looking at it? I reckon ED will be looking at it already. The reason they won't be commenting is because we all know what happens when a potential feature is hinted at, and then for whatever reason doesn't work out and is not implemented. All hell breaks loose on this forum with people saying "I only bought this software because you said it would have feature X and it doesn't, boohoo give me my money back". Best plan for them is to be 100% sure before making any statements I reckon.

Yes the back pressure changes in RL because you hold the stick in place while the speed of the aircaft slows, meaning it takes less force to hold the stick in place. However, unless you have a force feedback stick this won't be applicable in game. Essentially, just like a loop, you pull back on the stick and lock the pitch in place. The imprtant part is that as your nose comes back through the horizon after you pitch, you are wings level inverted, 90 degrees off your start heading, otherwise it will look ugly (not to mention you could also lose a heap of altitude and hit the ground). But yeah, sounds like he is talking about an aileron roll to me too.

Just to throw a cat amongst the pigeons re landing. I got a serving Huey pilot mate of mine to have a go with the module the other day. I haven't had time to play with my curves, so they are set stock. Having never used TrackIR or played any sim games before, he had no probs starting up, and was hovering very stable in about 10 secs once he got used to the controls. He then had a fly about but then completely stoved the aircraft into the ground when attempting to land. Overall he was really impressed with the module, the attention to detail, and he said all the sound was spot on. He did feel that the landing physics were not quite right, and felt the VRS was over modeled. He said that VRS is something they hardly worry about in the Huey. This is of course all completey subjective and only after around an hour of flying about.