winz

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TZeer again..." Great post.

Well, it can hit bombers at long ranges..that might be the purpose of those missiles.

So instead of upgrading, what ED thought would be reasonable to update (6 DoF for Su-25, A-10A, Su-27, F-15C), they should left all aircraft in old 2D cockpits? So they all be equal. Is that your train of though? Oh, and Su-25 got AFM long before FC 3 (if I remember correctly, it was in FC 1), and A-10C is not even part of FC... "Offer someone a finger and they take the whole hand" :)

I don't follow. FSX and DCS are using fundamentally different approaches for flight simulation. Each has it's plus and cons. The DCS one, beeing more complex, is sure to be more resource heavy. You cannot say that FSX is more optimized just because its algorithm requires less resource. That's just flawed. The lvl of DCS flight simulation is beyond anything you can accomplish with the approach FSX has taken. Is the increased fidelity worth the performance costs? Imho it is. My experience is that DCS is able to put smile on non-simmers faces, just because the sensation of flight is absolutely amazing. This is something I was never able to achieve in FSX. I'm not saying that DCS is the mother of optimization, parts of the engine are outdated and perform terrible on newer architectures. But ED is well aware of these issues, but drastic changes to the engine just cannot appear out of thin air, as you should know. But ED is trying to increase the COMBAT part as well. It's providing a common enviroment for different platform, creating a virtual battlefield. What players do with it is not EDs responsibility. ED is constantly increasing the tools mission designer have at their disposal. - Affaik they don't. - ED also have to develop and support the platform as well. Remember that DCS world is free. - Theeen, why should ED sell their product for less? I still don't understand why DCS modules are, by your opinion, overpriced. ED is in business for 20 years and afaik it's the only company that survived the decline of sim popularity. So I think they got their 'economics' right ;)

Yes, the life of FSX lies in the wast amount of addons available for it. Now let us look on the pricing. I.e. PMDG $70, A2A p51 Model + AccuSim - $30 + $25.....Enviromental addons like REX $44.95... Stock FSX has to do very little calculation. It has a simple flight model, it has no AI (that scheduled traffic without a flight model cannot be called AI), no ground pathfinding, no real system modeling, no dmg modeling, no balistic computation... It's 'very distant view' is AFAIK limited to 10nm for dynamic objects (airplanes). Dense autogen will butcher FPS even on modern rig. Yes, there are people who are able to make DCS lvl aircrafts, I don't think anybody questions that (belsimtek is one example), but those people will have such addons priced as a DCS lvl module, because doing them requires full dedication, skill and lots of knowledge about the modeled platform. Oh, and don't go all 'I'm a programmer' on me. Yes, I'm a programmer with master degree in software engineering, if you need to know.

No, just no. The stock planes in FSX are terrible to fly with. They have no weight and can be thrown around like paper planes., they are anything but realistic. Comparing DCS flight modelling with FSX is silly, just silly. You should realize that DCS is approaching the lvl of fidelity professional solutions have, and those are worth much more than $60 a licence key. Just because it doesn't have fancy terrain engine and whatnot, doesn't mean it isn't worth $60. Oh, and I think DCS is much more optimized than FSX, that 7 year old piece of a sim has performance issues even on modern rigs. And that's with simple flight modelling...

Hmm, interesting idea. Maybe also replace the trigered smoke marker with a real jtac. Shouldn't be that hard. :) You most likely couldn't save the mission because you weren't running DCS World as admin. Those missions are in /Program Files/ and you need admin rights to change them.

When you're takeing off from rwy 27, you're taking off westbound (around 270 degrees), 09 is eastbound (around 090 degrees) ;)

Its on Page 454 - Service limitations of I-251V Shkval Laser rangefinder operation mode for one flight, series (Each serie consists of 16 cycles of 10 seconds with 5 sec interval between the cycles.): 5 Interval between the series, min: 30

Yeah, thats plan B. :) But I consider it only fair to give the original owner the opportunity to decide :) No promises, but I plan to try to play shore the next time I'll require an A-10 fix, but dunno when that will be. Could be months :)

Hello. I think that the Su-25 in FC 3 suffered a lot with this immersive campaign not beeing part of FC 3. So I was wondering how much effort would it take to port it to FC 3 and started replaying this FC 2 campaign in FC 3 and slowly fixing all bugs that occur during porting. The campaign port is almost done - all missions are ported and working and I'm only doing some final playtesting. After that's done I would like to upload the campaign to the user files section..but... But I want to respect the campaigns author/right owner rights, so before doing so I would to have some kind of approval, most likely from ED, is it was part of FC 2. Could anyone get me a hint where/how to get this approval? :)

I know that laser overheating was modeled in BS1. If you did not follow the cycle that is descibed in the manual, then the laser would eventualy fail. Doesn't know if it is also the case in BS2, but looks so :) I follow these simple rules, and have never encountered a burned out laser 1) Use laser only when you're going to attack and require precice range measurement. The 'without laser' range is precise enough for most cases. 2) Wait for the countdown on hud to complete after each lase, before using the laser again.

Not at all if done correctly. Imho the computer assumes you're flying pursuit, matching the target maneuvers. It can then use the amount of G you're pulling to compute the offset between you and the target required to hit it. Because distance is unknow for the computer, this offset is computed for a distance range, and displayed as the funnel. You then 'select' the right distance-offset pair by placing the wingtips of your target on the funnel.

I gave this mod a try and man..what a difference :) Certainly makes looking around much more natural. Many many thanks PeterP for your effort and dedication :)

Excellent mod. Many thanks :)

AI SEAD is correctly engaging Snow Drift ( Buks search radar) after the patch.

This is the cause, and the solution. Use this mod http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1747938&postcount=7 to enable forward/back movement in the old cockpits.

Both. Also the quality of content has a huge effect on how much I enjoy a module. I.e. the DCS A-10C is a marvelously simulated airframa, but the buggy, medicore campaigns kinda prevented me to enjoy it fully. On the other hand, the Deployment campaign in Black Shark was exceptional and each DCS module should have such high quality campaign.

Native resolution (max) is allways better on LCDs

Hard? Complex would be a more fitting word. The best approach is to take baby steps, learn one thing at a time. Cold start, taxi, take-off, basic manoeuvres, landings....etc. It sounds like lot of boring stuff before you get to the juicy parts, but the opposite was true for me. The learning process is very rewarding (because of complexity of the sim) so even your first cold-start will no doubt leave you with a sense of achievement. How long did it take? Around a day before I dropped my first LGB the way I wanted. Much much more till I felt proficient with the platform. But, basically, you'll never stop to learn - that's one of the best part of DCS A-10C, I bough it in beta and there are still system and procedures I have little to no understanding of. :) If it appeals to you, go for it. You might feel overwhelmed at start, but is well beyond anything you can experience in FC 3 in terms of ground attack.

Yep, your eye can certainly see the difference. Might not be so obvious in current LCD era. But back in CRT age 60hz vs 100hz was very very obvious.

it's 720-790 because it's in torrs aka mm of mercury. :)

AFAIK Zoolander64 is not the crewchief. So, you don't know if it's his wording. You don't know what words he used in the actual lesson. Do you? So all I see is just marketing from someone trying to attract people to an event. Every second addon is using 'realistic' as a way to attract people (hell, even you in your signature), yet we don't see 10+pages thread discussing the credibility of some audio guy naming his mod 'real'. So what about we let those people who attended that event to speak about what and how they actually did. And then we can talk about if this event was beneficial to those attending, or a waste of time. Maybe some audio record will appear. And then you can be a good guy and use your knowledge to correct things that were wrongly stated. That's the kind of information I was looking for when I opened this thread... and only found 10 pages of useless blabering about whether or not that guy is credible enough to provide guides for a computer game...

Success in life? :D I don't value my sucess in life with my ability to perform in an entertainment sw :) Do you? It's precisely about the value of spare time. Most don't read manuals because of this, because most find other things more entertaining than reading manuals. Also, all people contributing to the community are doing so in their spare time. They could also be doing things much more entertaining than spending hours debugging trigger conditions in mission editor, or crawling through the sim directory structure, finding the one texture/sound they want to improve. Or spending hours writing up documents, charts, maps, or helping newcomers on forums...These sims would be dead without them. It's then so somewhat discrespectfull and arogant to look-down on people contributing to this community in their spare time, just because their IRL occupation doesn't require knowledge of things they are going to teach the general simmer about. Once again, they are providing guides for an entertainment SW, not some kind of official training. Yes, you're a irl military pilot, and you know more about those systems than that guy and such lessons don't have any value for you and you would no doubt find errors in what he teaches. But that is of no value to the community unless you find some way to share that knowledge.

No, most of the playerbase don't read manuals. Most haven't read the game manual fully even once. Haven't seen a checklist, don't do checklists. Don't have a clue about proper procedures, tactics. Don't plan their attacks, don't use weapon profiles. Most of the playerbase never will, because the knowledge required to do so is contained in hard digestible materials. Only the most hardcore sim fans will sacrifice hours of 'fly time' to read boring manuals and then spend another hours practicing those procedures. Hell, most of people don't event know such material exists. If anyone (crewchief, lawyer, 'sanitary manager') is taking the time and effort to process all this information into an easy to follow interactive training for the general playerbase then no-one have any right to go around disrespecting that guy "but he's a crewchief, he only checks oil levels", when you don't have any idea about the information he actually provided . He is providing some guides for a freaking entertainment software, not guiding someone performing brain surgery on some of you realatives, so get of your horse...irl military pilots.. This is why we cannot have nice things, because some jerks claim they know better, but cannot be arsed to do better.