topdog

I got the very first of amazon.co.uk's shipments of the warthog, and the colourful hog box was inside typical amazon brown packaging material, and not any 'original' brown box packing it may have arrived (to them) in. The serial number was higher than many other hogs being bought by people several weeks later than mine, I guess that's just distribution channels and times for you, but it certainly was in no doubt 'new' with respect to cable ties and so forth. So.. I guess my point is, if you thought amazon would ever use anything but their own packaging outside the coloured box, I don't think that would happen (unless you buy from one of the shops that sell under amazon's name, but not fulfilled and shipped by amazon themselves) as they're rather proud of their packaging approach (ref: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200392050 ), and you can't really read much into the serial numbers. The other things you mention are fair/valid sounding to me though to be cautionary, seems like you got one that someone else had returned for refund (for some reason).

I'd feel I'm the same but unless you have the stick and throttle fixed down, or can prevent the cable from having any hang from the socket (which is basically what my tape is reinforcing against), it does tend to work itself loose at the most inconvenient time causing that problem, and it also seems to be something that worsens with age. It's not a showstopper for me but it was a bit disappointing from a build quality aspect, and there have been many reporting the same issues with the cable connection between the two units.

A small but practical reason - if the worst happens and I should have to send mine back under warranty, and it comes back with a different serial - I will for sure be looking it up to see if I have a refurb from someone else who sent theirs back that had problems too, so I can bitch or test as necessary.

Permit Crash Recovery checkbox, in amongst the options for flight model and infinite ammo/fuel/etc.

You might want to check the cable or contacts between the throttle and joystick. This usually happens when the mini-din gets loose on the joystick (I taped the cable/connection in place using electrical tape to limit this happening).

How are the LEDs programmed, what software does that? Like, is there any source for a MS Flight Simulator plugin or other sim where it's done? Or a published(ish) API like the X52 Pro has for programming the LEDs? There is certainly way to export the data from BS and lua, I've done it before for the X52's lights, but Saitek had provided an easy-enough API for that. I'm still waiting on seeing how the programmable LEDs in the hog are to be set (Target software is meant to add that capability for the warthog hotas, but how it will work I don't quite yet know).

These DirectX files with the _nn.dll names, are the updated .dll's that come in the later releases/distributions of that version of DirectX... so like, if you have 'only' the Feb 2010 distribution update of DirectX 9, and you get an error of this kind, you probably are out of date again and need the July one (etc.) instead. So that's why 'reinstalling' tends to work, you're not really re-installing per se, but updating with newer files with newer names. This was needed when the game got patched, as the source was built against the equivalently updated distribution of the DXSDK rather than the original one it was built and shipped against years ago. Check the 'DirectX bi-monthly updates' entry in the table of releases (actually released quarterly now, but still being updated): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX

http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/user/180317-mizzy/ http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/user/180317-mizzy/page__tab__idm I don't have permission to download them myself (probably because I don't have a lockonfiles.com account), but they seem to be hosted ok, including a mig25 skin. Also the rapidshare link here still seems to work, for something or other ;) : http://forums.eagle.ru//showthread.php?t=27889

I've been making 'grrrr' sounds at Saitek's website for the last few weeks over lack of any updates. All I've seen from them is talk about taking them to a couple of shows to show them off, but no word on actual release. I have just under 2 weeks to get some solid info on a release about those pedals before I will likely need to cave in and get something else anyway. If they're too much I might just settle for regular Saitek ones too, I'd likely not spend over £200 on pedals, £125 is about my limit as far as impulsive buying of them would be, anything over that and I'd reconsider.

Although it doesn't seem too practical (usually) to push the stick to the limits, there was some talk as to how the square-shaped insert when rotated might cause some strange play when rotated 15 degrees (because it would then also be rotated to a lop-sided diamond shape).. I think I'd need to try it to really see if it was something that would bother me though, the plane likes to flip over if you push it too hard, and I'd not likely hit those extents in the shark either.

When the warthog hotas arrives, I suggest after playing with it a bit in the A10C you also have another go at the Shark - I think you'll be (pleasantly) surprised :)

Start with the wiki ( http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Export_1_0_1 ) and look at what others have done with LUA in Lockon; it's all 'readable' code. The mods forum and to a lesser extent the home cockpits one will give you leads to projects you can download, install, and play with. You can both set and read different values, so long as it makes sense. For example, you can't just midflight change your ammo counter from 0 to 100, but you can flick a switch in the cockpit you'd normally be able to flick.

I haven't owned a cougar, but I could just say that if the cougar WAS as good as the warthog (which I do have), I would a) have kicked myself for not getting one before, and b) kicked everyone else for having kept it a secret :p Regarding being 'dedicated' to the craft, not really, since these aren't the original A10 flight stick / throttle anyway, the A10c borrowed them from other craft (though people talk about a loss of rotaries compared to f16 controls on the stick as being a difference?). I'm finding it a little weird getting used to with Blackshark, though the flight quality improvement offsets that by the bucket load.

Shortage of throttle / underspeeding rotors (power management problems) Dropping below 4m Manually switching off INU These all seem to have one thing in common, and that is it stops the INU 'working', which in turn stops the heli from using INU to determine where it is on the ground in relation to a position (presumably other devices like gps can still help determine your position, but not for purposes of maintaining a hover point automatically). If you're under 50kph the line that extends from the center of the hud to give you a relational speed and direction indicator also seems to derive from this. Lose that line (below 50kph) and you lose the heli's ability to apply dampeners to keep the heli on position at a hover point. (Track recorded in v1.0.2 by the way). hover_vs_inu.trk

Using TCP? My apps always had to suffix onto any 'message' I wanted to send and be received in blackshark with a linefeed (ascii 10), otherwise it just queued up in some buffer. Then receive() calls would contain data in them.

Latched for playing some games (including blackshark) even though it basically means only mapping 1 axis anyway and leaving the other not associated to anything, and unlatched for flying A10c.

Note also that LED brightness is not currently 'controllable' through TARGET and it should be (by the time TARGET is actually released, and not just a beta/release candidate); it's possible it'll include options for a delayed timeout (other backlit devices I have, have something like this) for when it'll power-save itself and turn them off.

Seems to be a typo here, hopefully you can clear it up for peop's as to which it should really be :) The red values should either be both 0 or both 1. StereoMemoEnabled REG_DWORD 0x00000001 (0) StereoTextureEnable REG_DWORD 0x00000001 (1)

And if all else fails, save the track file after a flight where you can demo the problem and post it. If there's anything missed or special going on we'll see it.

Great, thanks. I was looking for this (last) only yesterday so didn't expect this. I had not even installed the previous one due to the known keyboard language fault (fixed now), but did want to try it. Seems the 5 programmable LEDs are still on the todo list though, hope they get that done soon.

I held my proclip on with just a makeshift bandana for a while (it was actually an old jiu-jitsu belt :D). Even if it doesn't fit directly onto a given headset it should be easy to somehow clip or tie it on to something else that does.

The only part you could say isn't pure marketing, is that microelectronics can still have slight variations that cause problems even with the same brand/model/specifications (hence what I was referring to as 'harmony' when using them together), and SOME of the vendors that provide kits will assert that the kit itself has been tested together and works in a dual or in a triple channel configuration as applicable. That isn't to say all vendors even do that, though, but then neither does it have to be strictly necessary, it's just a small piece of mind and convenience. Carney, I think you'll do OK with that approach; I have faith and pleasant experiences in Corsair's mid to high range memory brands (and gone from a kit to a non-kit pair of memory modules without problem in the past, for dual channel systems). Succellus, one thing to beware of with that (trying to populate 2 banks of triple channel) is that it will put more strain (relatively speaking) on your machine to deliver power to the RAM modules, and that can adversly affect the overclocking potential. I believe - not something I have personal experience with this time though - that is due to the desire in getting better overclocking rates and stability/lifetime by keeping voltages low, but in doing so end up not supplying enough consistent juice to power all the sticks, so they become unstable instead. Thus filling in all the banks with sticks can lead to reduced tolerances in how much both ends of your system can be tweaked. If you're not interested at all in overclocking, that wouldn't be a problem, but if you are, plan ahead for that to make the right decision and compromise to get what you want.

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-channel_architecture This talks about the enabler for the architecture, which requires - supporting motherboard (because it has a supporting chipset and memory controller), supporting CPU (to request and use the memory), and then the right quantity of identical sticks of RAM. Then look at the specifications covering sticks of RAM themselves, and there's no comments to be made about dual or triple channels because it's not really relevant, just a cursory related link to the other article near the bottom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SDRAM This is no different to when people were first moving from 'single channel' to dual channel architecture, and iterated in replies given to people asking the same questions: http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=178662 "[Vendor X] could easily use triple channel, there is no physical difference between the sticks of memory that go into a DDR3 triple channel setup versus dual channel. But its much more expensive for only a little more performance." "It is all the same RAM, ALL OF IT. It is just how they sell it. The ram is the same, how it is used is different." http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/278397-12-triple-channel-question "Dual- and triple-channel kits are just packaging. It is the same as if you bought 2 or 3 identical individual modules. Nothing fancy here. Triple-channel architectures only work as triple-channel when all 3 channels are populated with DIMMs (at least one DIMM). Otherwise, they will "downgrade" to dual-channel if you only populate 2 DIMMs. If you buy 2 x dual-channel kits, that is the same as 4 x individual modules. You populate 3 of them across all of the channels to enable triple-channel mode, then you have one leftover as a 2nd DIMM in the first channel. Should work."

The kits or pairs are only sold to improve in the 'harmony' of running the memory in that configuration; coming from the same batch, same vendor, same brand, with all the same timings, equates to no loss of performance due to slight differences that then outweight the benefits of trying to get dual/triple channel performance. The memory itself is just memory, it will work in whatever combination the motherboard says it will work in. The architectural changes are not (specifically enabling this) on the sticks themselves. If you bought 2 'dual channel' DDR3 memory kits and used 3 of the sticks (leaving 1 to the side) you could quite easily put them in and use them as a triple channel kit, so long as the harmony isn't broken. You could also buy 3 separate sticks from 3 different shops and still be in with a reasonable chance of it working out under these conditions. So, your best bet for moving from dual to triple channel (provided the mobo supports it, and it sounds like you've already done the homework on that,) is to replace the lot or add an identical stick to the 2 you have already got. Mixing them up with different vendors/brands/models is risky and/or bad.

I'm all for helping people, but as I mentioned on this other bot's thread, it's just a bot (albeit a slightly wonky one), necroing 2 year old threads/posts by creating brand new copies of them: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=579294&postcount=1 The profiles link is appreciated though.