Jump to content

MikeMikeJuliet

Members
  • Posts

    1212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by MikeMikeJuliet

  1. I'm not *complaining* about patches coming in the wrong day... point is not the day itself. That is superficial. The point is that something was communicated that doesn't hold at all. In this case the implications are nonexistent. But I'm after the principle. Have you checked the publish dates for most of the last 2 months of patches? :D It isn't just "one special case". It is good that things get fixed no matter the day. Now I'm just looking for the magic patch to get the Harrier into the sim... and the Hornet... and 2.5... and... :P EDIT: oh and ON TOPIC... No fix for the F-15 HSI distance indicator yet? I was looking forward for a patch to fix it...
  2. Holy moly! This kind of feature should be implemented to every DCS-module to be part of the base game! Or at the very least every module should get a data-cartridge system for people to use your program on... Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  3. Of course. For all I care the patches can be published on tuesdays at 0334Z... I also understand that it is not a big deal that the updates come on another day at times. But this all goes back to communication between ED and the customers. What was the point of disclosing the change in patch-day if none of the patches for the last 2-3 months are always on fridays regardless? It just seems strange. And YES I know I'm commenting on a subject that on the surface doesn't matter in any shape or form. Forgive me for I am of the "principles first" kind of person and thus the matter sort of made my brain go "why?". Don't take me *too* seriously, alright. But hey, good weekend everyone! Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  4. A slight tangent here... but didn't ED report a few months back (or is it already half a year?) that wednesday is the new patch day to give themselves time to haul out hotfixes prior to weekend. Now, for the last 2 months every update has again arrived on a friday. What gives? Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  5. I'm affected as well. 1.5.7. latest version.
  6. Those poor, poor pilots :D Looking forward to your next newsletter.
  7. This has been the case for a long time. I remember probably around 6 months or so the same behaviour. You might have seen this Ejection around 1 minute. @joey45 also looks like the canopy opens before the seat ejects... The canopy frame should stay put and the cords should detonate the glass for the seat to lauch. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  8. Just as a sidenote, is everyone here talking about the same units? The cockpit can be configured with both kmph and kt. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  9. Something I just got to play is Simple Planes. Simple - yes - but really fun. You build your own plane with relatively realistic ground rules (or pick a pre-built one) and then just fly it around, do some aerobatics of some arcade shooting. Basic aircraft controls work all as they should and you are presented with a simple instrument layout with throttle setting, speed, altitude, heading and an ADI for attitude plus fuel. My 2-year old son was so happy when I showed him what happens when you move the throttle forward. Not nearly as realistic in outlook as Kerbal Space Program, but realistic enough to give you a good amount of gameplay tweaking your dream-aircraft. Have a look. It is on Steam http://store.steampowered.com/app/397340/SimplePlanes/ Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  10. Is there a formula for the calculation and is it provided in the manuals?
  11. The "problem" with the Albatros, MiG-15 or any other such aircraft is that they soon require some systems management not present in the FC3 aircraft. Waypoints for example... don't have those on the Albatros, so you would need to start teaching proper instrument navigation quite soon if she enjoys anything above just cruising above random fields. With the FC3 you just select the waypoint you want and - well - fly there. That should sink in soon enough without making things dubious. There is also the fact that you don't need to worry about doing anything with the switches, so mouse can be forgotten about for the time being. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  12. I'm especially intrigued by possibility to jam GPS... brilliant!
  13. Such variety would bring some pleasant variance to the visuals no doubt. Perhaps some day...
  14. Not in order of relevance: remove the current "clouds" and replace them with Stratus clouds, Stratocumulus, Cumulus, Towering cumulus, Cumulonimbus, Altostratus, Altocumulus and Cirrus clouds for starters. Turbulence in Cumulus-type clouds. Icing in Low/medium altitude clouds, freezing fog, freezing rain. Temperature inversion conditions. Jetstreams. Cloud coverage in octals rather than decimals (Cloud coverage in aviation is reported in octals: 0, 1-2 "Few", 3-4 "Scattered", 5-6 "Broken", 7-8 "Overcast"). Low atmosphere turbulence from ground temperature changes - dependent on sun. Clear air turbulence (CAT). A complete revamp of the current weather interface to allow for full control of all the previous aspects. Just to name a few. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  15. Of course. But there are desirable midway points between the current barebones system and a full scale simulation. Just because we can't have every raindrop simulated doesn't mean we should be left with the current model which in my opinion is a joke of a weather system. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  16. I don't remember when it was last discussed, but ED has told us previously that the overwing vapour effect is in the works eventually for 2.5. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  17. Agreed. Although not every cloud introduces turbulence... it depends on the airmass and the type of cloud. On a broader scope the whole weather system in DCS should be recreated. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  18. Yes, options are always welcome of course!
  19. ED stated that there will be a pre-sale period before early acces release. So no, no Harrier release today. Sorry to crush the dream. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  20. One addition I would like to make is: Redo the kneeboard as a 3D object into the cockpit, and have it be usable like any cockpit button, switch and knob. The kneeboard should be placed on either knee, even if the pilot model is invisible. A 2D object in the cockpit as well as use of the briefing screen and the F-10 map is neither realistic nor immersive. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  21. I wish the L-39 had similar kneeboard pages as the MiG-21 so that I could look up the necessary Radio, RSBN and PRMG frequencies in-cockpit. In addition, eve though the frequencies can be viewed and changed in the mission editor, this is not possible in multiplayer, leaving the player empty handed as to what frequencies are tuned in. The information should be available via the kneeboard (dynamic pages if possible) to make sure the user has access to this very relevant info. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  22. I find the forward limit a bit too limiting for usability... any idea if the mod affects MP integrity check or not? And a sidenote, we are talking about the head movement limits... not the zoom. Those are two completely different things. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
  23. How about building a simpit for those :D
  24. Wasn't the MiG-23 "in plans" a while ago with one of the 3rd party devs, but was then quickly pulled back due to ED having some other plans... or is my memory fooling me? Just a hunch, but I would assume a MiG-25 would be the newest aircraft from the Red side to be modelled fully to DCS at this time... the MiG29/Su-27 could perhaps follow suite afger some years, but those would probably be early variants only. But as said, this is just a hunch. No proper fact to back it up. I'm looking forward to the eventual MiG-23.
  25. SDK = Software Developement Kit. You don't have access to it unless ED gives it to you, and the EFM is not available without it. Considering the clickability vs full fidelity. No, the clickable cockpit is not my definition of a DCS-level modeled aircraft. But if you actually have followed the Community A-4E project, you understand that the team there have done everything possible with the SFM modelling to bring the aircraft to the highest standard possible without the SDK. That with extensively modeled systems and a clickable cockpit is what I'm getting at here. If the mod developers are to be believed, the A-4E flies exactly as intended apart from some edge cases. For the moment, every aircraft in DCS that is clickable is also a "full fidelity aircraft". I'm not commenting on their current state (bugs of WIP features). If an aircraft would be introduced to the sim with something in the middle of the two, I don't mind adding a new definition if needed. As for the A-4E. By all accounts it has been developed to its fullest extent considering the limitations of not being an official 3rd party developer. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet
×
×
  • Create New...