159th_Falcon

Lemme take a guess. This cannot be determined on an per A/C basis but has to be determined on an per Developer basis because they can have fastly different resources and abilities to model a certain craft.

Well yeah, but i didn't mean just the Russian craft. Should have put an F22 in there or something. Cause the same laundry list was used as argument towards modern western planes. EDIT Sniped by Eddie In that case things may need to be formulated a bit different in the future then. Cause i always understood it as ........by ANYONE. instead of .........by Eagle Dynamics.

Nothing personal towards you Kinney. But wouldn't you be at the very least confused if the following happend? December 2012; Someone asks on forum for an SU-27 whatever latest variant, or SU-34 PAK FA etc etc. Someone from ED replies whit, impossible, not enough information for any level of simulation, not DCS, not FC, probably not even game mode. And if there was information, it would simply not be allowed to any kind of realistic re-presentation. What has changed in those few months that all of a sudden it now can be done, at the highest level of simulation i am aware off? Whoever can explain the above to me wins the Nobel Price for Peace of Falcons mind. EDIT, Looking forward to other things you announced btw, like terrain and WWII era plane's. Its just the F35 that we were always told by ED was not possible because..........laundry list of reasons here.

Really, yet when people asked before this F35 announcement, they were let to believe how well modeled everything is in the A10C. Down to aerodynamics, engine performance, hydraulic and electrical system. Failures were apparently not a part of weapon A hitting part H but due to elaborate damage and systems modelling. Down to the electrical current being drawn by systems etc etc. So now then, what is it. Option A, as realistic as we were always let to believe Option B, an elaborate and ever changing scam that the publisher changes the definition of throughout its live cycle's to what suite's there needs best at that given time. Option C,.....................

Maybe it doesn't help that ED, Testers and Mods themselves said it was not possible just months ago? BECAUSE: data is not possible to get, classified, yada yada yada. How often didn't we get to hear that in the infamous wishlist threads. What also doesn't help is that people in this thread say sufficient data is publicly available. I have yet to see ANY links. I'm looking forward to the terrain development of this DEV though. Along whit possible network code tweaks, cause they seem to be quite keen on the multilayer side of things. Maybe call the F35 and FC level plane, and i might start believing.

DCS is certainly not dying, but whit the recent announcement of the DCS F35 i cant help but feel that standards are being lowered. DRASTICALLY. Simply because, just a couple month's ago, ED (mods and testers) were saying themselves it simply was not possible to simulate such aircraft. Certainly not on DCS level. Also, in the F35 thread it has been repeatedly said that's there is an surprising amount of publicly available data on the F-35. Yet no one bothers to post links, and\or sources. Personally, i'd be already happy if they could make the F35 to the current FC level of fidelity. And label it as such, instead of DCS. There is an announcement from the same developer i am very much looking forward to though. Which is the development of new terrain.

Question, is there any way to command your unit's to; Hold Fire Return Fire Fire at will and most importantly stop them from firing at bloody supply trucks if there is anything armed in the vicinity. Its driving me mad. I order them to engage a couple of abrams and they opt to shoot the supply trucks instead.:doh: Its a fun game, but im surprised by the limited amount of options it offers when it comes to ordering units.

Normally spoken, no. The blades simply get stretched out to much due to rotor RPM. Though, if rotor RPM was to drop significantly, for whatever reason, then it might occur. Helicopter rotors are quite flexible. Will also depends on if the rotor blades are of the original type or more modern composite ones. (the latter being much stiffer)

Don't care, still want it. Also a bit surprised that ED hasn't even reacted to this whole thread yet.

Suppressive Fire. In the broadest meaning of the term. Now that we have the UH-1H and the MI-8MTV2 it makes sense to implement. Lots of people have shitloads of fun at the moment inserting and extracting troops from LZ's. Though, if your getting fired at there's is bugger all you can do about it. Now, if suppressive fire, or rather the effects there-off would be modelled. It would make sense to escort the troop carriers, and saturate cover providing areas whit rocket\guns to suppress the enemy so the troop carriers can land relatively safely. A second thing i'd like to see pertains to the Mission Editor. Currently there are a couple AI difficulty settings. One is lacking though, "realistic" Assume i don't have to explain that one.

From what i can see your doing everything right. Been a while i used this AP feature of the SU-25T so maybe it got broken in any of the patches? Works fine for me, could you post a track file showing the behavior? (didn't use the laser btw) Are you flying in Game or Realistic mode?

Sorry, but can't believe any F-35 module should be able to bear the tag DCS. If it wasn't for the fact that it simply can't be done, then it would be for the fact that it's impossible for anyone but the DEV's to verify it's accuracy. And don't forget, to get the DCS tag. not only the aircraft needs to be modeled right. Also it's weapons. Highly skeptical on this one. And i hope it will be rebranded to something else than "DCS". Funny enough, when people here where asking for ED to model things like F-35, F-22 and PAK-FA the response of ED (moderators) was that's its not possible.......... And now, all of a sudden............ you catch my drift.

Depends, but usually 8 should be just fine. But if you are using some very high resolution, or using custom textures whit larger file sizes then more might pay off. Also depends a bit on how future proof ya wanna be.

Awesome, crawling like the dedi server or on a dead stop atm?

Here's a list of various ED forums user groups, take your pic. Guess a PM to Sobek or Groove would be a good start though; http://forums.eagle.ru/showgroups.php

Would it be possible to use multiple sound devices for DCS? What i am currently doing is have TS running on headset and DCS on speakers. Would be nice if you could select cockpit sounds to be on your headset and the others on you speakers from within DCS though.

I'm sorry if you feel like i am advertising in your thread. Truth is, there is plenty non-squad people active on our TS. And our server is also there for the public to use, and providing missions. Thought that would actually have helped meeting people and making friends. Anyway, if you feel differently, then i hereby apologize and won't make any more posts in this thread. ~S~ Falcon

Can't be easy to Coff, then again, we know you guys like a good challenge. (delivered by the end of the year?:D)

Ofcourse not, feel free to use the 159th TS server if you guys wish. Its there for the community to use. On the 159th game server you can type /m into the chat to get a mission list. type /v missionnumber (/v 4) to start a mission vote type /yes to vote yes and /no to vote no. If enough people voted yes the server will restart whit the selected mission. (well, that's the theory..........:D)

Pretty awesome results you got there. Think i just decided what CPU to buy, eventhough it has an (to me) useless GPU on board. BTW, any of you ever made/modified there own computer casing? Thinking of giving it a try so i can optimize it for cooling airflow and cable management. Also going to try and "cool" the back side of the motherboard, see if it makes a difference to overall temps.

Porky_pig, can i assume you ment "change" instead of "phase" in your above post? If you did meant "phase" then could you explain what your talking about? Cause i have no idea of a changing temperature phase.

Just to be certain Bear, you are NOT saying that; The transition trough ETL is exaggerated in the flight model itself. But only in the effects it has on the airframe in terms of noise and vibrations?

Your sure? would bet i sank trough it. Let me try again later today and see what happens.

If you guys are interested, feel free to team up whit some 159th Pilots. There's a good couple flying the Huey, living in Canada and USA as well as europe. You can sign up to our forums and suggest flying times there, or ask in the websites shoutbox. Or just keep an eye on our TS3 server 78.129.193.145:10119 pw, jacksparrow (always forget if its a CAPITAL J or just j) http://www.159thgar.com Our squad currently operates the Huey in some mission's to explore the possibilities and as a place holder for the Mi-8.

Yes, pitch is full down in the pic, as can also be seen on this pic; Just see i forgot to include it in the original post. link to 1920*1200 ress pic; http://i569.photobucket.com/albums/ss133/FalconTwo/DCS%20World/85f9bbf4-2b84-40e3-93a5-ea9ea40f1a93.jpg~original