S77th-konkussion

China hat down?

although he has responded to a question that is a few weeks old- FWIW I saw the actual box on the shelf in Target yesterday... And they weren't even dusty!

Going to try this tonight...

How many times have you watched your typical Discovery / History network doc. that spotlighted a simulator? First listening to the host's dumb questions and then as a final insult- having to endure the host attempting to fly... Don't you just wanna SLAP that guy and say get the *^%! outta my chair... anyway... I can see the differences in the graphics in those alone. Older docs - you could see the terribly pixelated terrain, and comic book looking explosions... A more recent doc highlighted a USN F/A 18 (forgot where) that was VERY impressive by comparison... but still pretty bad for our purposes..

Well.. they do care. Let's call it "more than they used to, but not quite to the level that we do". Real life size military simulators are becoming more lifelike with every version- both in terms of feel and the outside world graphics.. Although I am no longer in the service my horse sense tells me that there is no shortage of [involved] people pushing for improvements to anyone in the chain of command who will listen. Then -as you say- it becomes a balancing act of funding, effectiveness, etc.. (like everything else)

I cannot say with certainty that this was the case. It's entirely possible that TGP was SOI Thanks.

Yow! I'm bringing this comment to the attention of our CO- located in Taz. and a recent purchaser of CH.. Get his thoughts here.. Heh you do see the irony of your callsign "latearrival" bringing a 6 yr old thread back to life? :megalol:

Looks like online is the best bet, then. :)

If it matters or helps in elimination- 2x ATI 4890's here- has never happened.

heh.. yeah.. maybe it was sorta dead... A couple of flybys had me thinking I seen a little green on it.. but who knows..

Similar problem the other night- was able to get everything up to the point of putting the maverick into a tracking state. Never did work on that target. Only thing I can figure is that the target was already dead- but it didn't really look dead... Other hit targets in mission looked to be in a bit worse shape..

and thanks for confirming your level of maturity. You go have fun with your Nintendo DS- Mom will call you for dinner soon.

gettin warmer.. (I think..)

BS was based on a military contract? I thought it was said or implied that this was a choice made my developers due to... typical motivations- access to info, and some TV show that is or was wildly popular in RU..

eh and why would hardcore simmers with $100's of dollars invested in realistic controllers and years of study and effort want to waste energy trying to fight in an arena where anyone that can fog a mirror can click a mouse 3 times and take you down with a 120mm howitzer that fires at 50 rds. a minute? All while cleaning his bong chamber. In other words- It doesn't seem to me that the world of arcade & the world of simulation mix too good in many ways... The majority play the arcade because they're just not that into it. The funny part is when a console gamer shows up at this doorstep and starts mouthing off about whatever he is not "satisfied" with.. Pick one- or enjoy them both for what they are and offer. If you're bored- that's a you problem. Plenty of ways to mix it up.

same. Cannot login- Page is there, but it's behaving as though I have the wrong info typed in. I don't need anything on the site- just mentioning it..

yeah- I don't have BS, cause I just don't care about that thing, but I have a lot of respect for how hard everyone worked to acheive it. The sim is a hell of a piece of kit. They even made it MP compatible with FC2- something that was not supposed to happen- until it did. I don't know if they will make another that works with A10c and the following modules or not- but it's always been what you make of it. Quit flying lonewolf /solely for stats and use the vast array of FREE tools out there designed to connect you to others and add to your overall immersion..

Cancel that- It turns out that the primary problem came from combining my 3 devices into one in CHM. I am not aware of how to reverse this once done. It's definitely better to start a profile fresh, and not modify an existing one (from LOMAC as an example.)

If your brakes have the same axis as the pitch or roll-is that not a conflict? I use CH (no scripting enabled for DCS) Firstly- in FC2 I needed to be in mapped mode (all 3 devices combined into "CM Device 1" in DCS) to assign the axis properly. In DCS (mapped mode)-NONE of the 3 brake axis' would even respond to the actuation of the brakes. I had a progressive braking script that still seemed to kind of work... so I left it blank in DCS. Also- it seems I cannot double click the axis I want to assign and bring up the box either. In direct mode- the 3 components are listed separately and will respond to pedal actuation- but like you- they respond with JOY_X & JOY_Y and in both cases it shows as a conflict right in the axis assignment box. In short- can't assign CH pedals to L&R brakes at all...

@GG Well-- get on that will ya? :D

:megalol:

Never had an issue with Acers I've bought either.

Me neither. The best indicator I've seen is that there was significant effort being expended on the details of the F18 within the confines of LOMAC. It looked better and more detailed than some of the flyables did lol... Fun to discuss "what it meant" at the time, but that's a helluva long ways off from properly flying the damn thing in DCS

Isn't Simware the site that has been publishing 100% imaginary release dates for ED material since LOMAC 1.0? By now- this has earned a place in the FAQ's.. even though few read them..

I'm not so sure.. Although not perfectly represented- I'd rather have this, as I think it might be tough to model a pilot twisting his torso/ lowering shoulders around to look over his shoulders..