Jump to content

reece146

Members
  • Posts

    617
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About reece146

  • Birthday 04/01/1950

Personal Information

  • Location
    ON, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

8194 profile views
  1. You are likely correct with the premise that a lot of the bugs are due to game engine or similar scale subsystems being upgraded and their API contract or similar having been changed. There's an argument that this is the case where communications are important. There is a difference between pinned by architectural changes and just not having resources to do the work. To be fair, not sure how you discuss that publicly with your customers. There's another argument that if the code was sufficiently designed and architected that the contract could be extended versus immediate deprecation of interfaces upgrades. I dunno, speculating wildly out in left field obviously, but given the scale of the engine and modules in DCS the development model should be following some form of large scale devops development model and be architected such that API interfaces can deal with different versions of the contracts - much like is done with applications gateways and microservices these days. It's all blather. Perhaps they are doing these things, perhaps it's all best effort in a semi-coordinated way, who knows. It seems like ED has been doing well with delivery. There's much less big borkages with OB releases in the last 12-18 months from memory. Everyone is pinning hopes on the new threaded/Vulkan backend letting things get updated in a consistent manner. Things like these old modules will need to be brought forward at the same time and hopefully the items I was going on about above has been considered as part of that process. $0.02
  2. We've had great experiences with 2nd-3rd engineering and computer science students working on complex projects... so yeah, ymmv.
  3. Bug fixes should be provided as per industry standard. What that looks like at ED I'm not certain, but anything beyond 2-3-4...8 sprint cycles after a bug has been identified and accepted by ED needs to have some words around it why it can't be fixed in a reasonable time frame. My fear is that if a long running bug is not specifically called out as "waiting for new technology X to be implemented" then it will just languish on the back log indefinitely to become a regression on the next major release. There is a difference between a feature, a skin/model update, and the ability to use WEP as a realistic experience. The WEP example is a bug and should be fixed in the short term. Things take time, that's understood. I'm involved in a very large scale software development project with general public customer facing mobile and embedded device apps. I get that time lines can look ugly. But a little bit of comms would go to reducing the "tone" this thread has in its title - perhaps - yes you can't please everyone but most people in this thread seem reasonable, practical so... Does ED have a program to hire "summer students" and put them on to these things? We have had good luck with that at my work place. Sick the students on the low hanging stuff that our full time devs just can't smear themselves thin enough to get to.
  4. I'm cool with a paid upgrade of the warbirds. Much like having a "free" cloud service available indefinitely is not viable over the long term, perhaps similarly a DCS module that has been dragged through the last 10 years is not viable. That said - I do want some additional value. Someone above suggested additional variants. I like that idea. For example I would love a flyable P-51B in the Shangri-La livery. Perhaps some Korean War spec Mustangs as playmates for the Sabre and Mig-15. And some stuff in the middle where it is low hanging fruit. The A-36? Probably not exactly low hanging fruit for that one. Likewise Bf-109E, Spit Mk 1/V/XIV, FW-190F8, etc., etc. But I'm a bit of a module whore so take it for what it's worth. All this said, do we know that the annual sales (units sold) of the Mustang in 2021 was not the same as in 2012? No, of course we don't. There's always new people coming into the sim. Maybe it's a non-issue and getting resources focused is more the issue with this specific module (see my post above). At any rate, given that a module on sale costs about the same as a round of drinks after work on Friday I'm not too sussed about flipping ED some coin to get sh!te done if that is what it takes - provided there is value - whatever that looks like. $0.02
  5. See the link to SWAPR above - it does what you want.
  6. My "gut" says that we will see improvements on long awaited bugs, fixes, and features once they work around a lot of the old code and technical debt still stuck in the 2.x code base... v2.9 (3.x?)... With the refactoring that must be going on for multi-thread and Vulkan I'd expect that after a big release (hopefully not too bumpy) some of these old problems will get the attention they need.
  7. Re: the Mustang livery - you can hand edit the livery file to unlock it from the country code. I don't have it in front of me but iirc is pretty straightforward, typically last line in the livery file. The Marianas is nice for certain. Really looking forward to the WW2 version. I also enjoy Cyprus/Syria. I like to buzz around my old haunts in Nicosia and Larnaca when I was a kid.
  8. Thanks for the missions. I'll give them a go. I've been flying the Marianas mostly with the Hind - but not lately. I have a bunch of pre-mande missions for the Yak on Caucasus so normally I just grab one of those missions and go from there. Finding the time to get beyond hopping into the seat and flying is hard these days. I'll try out your mission next time.
  9. I flew the Yak for the first time last night in about... well... well before the New Year at any rate. Not sure I noticed much difference in the flight model. It might be easier to maintain steady state, level flight speed at lower throttle settings. Take off seemed to take less speed and rotation - but still feels kind of weird to me... like the tires are sticky with the pavement or something. I've never been able to take off without feeling like I've had to give the old girl a kick in the ass to separate from the ground. I haven't delved in to aerobatic flying so can't say if there's noticeable changes at 10/10ths of the performance envelope. Like a lot of people I just use the plane as a relaxing day touring and bush flying craft. Once upon a time I posted a feature request post that suggested what real life Yak owners are doing... retrofitting lighted gauges, NS430 type devices, and larger internal fuel tanks in the wings. One can dream. Last night's flight was pretty good. About an hour in I got lost in the twilight and low ceiling trying to get down from the flat lands east of Batumi into the valley that leads to the airport. Landscape up there reminds me of Labrador a bit - never been on that part of the map before - at least not at a low enough altitude to notice what it was like near the ground. It always makes me smile when the ground vehicles turn on their headlights. Silly. I noticed on user files there is a recent trim fix mod to make her fly straight. I may try that tonight.
  10. reece146

    Pain! When?

    Yep - have those. Tonnes of fun.
  11. reece146

    Pain! When?

    Eff!!! For!!!! You!!!! So pumped! Soon? <ish?!>
  12. Went for a quick flight - needle pointing at the screw head is trim tab flush with the elevator. Moving the trim tab through out it's range matches the visuals to the gauge.
  13. Can you not adjust trim and use an external view to see where the trim tab is set? I'll have to check that out later... Not that it matters - set the trim to what gives the desired feedback from the aircraft until you get an intuitive feel for what the setting does to the aircraft versus the gauge. FWIW, one notch below is what I set for takeoff otherwise I ignore the gauge. $0.02
×
×
  • Create New...