Jump to content

animaal

Members
  • Posts

    155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by animaal

  1. I joined DCS multiplayer last night for the first time in ages, but didn't notice this server. Every server I saw had modern planes, and I prefer to fly the older birds mostly. No point flying a Mig-15 against Hornets! If it takes time to spool up and take off, it's frustrating to be shot down by an enemy you can't see. Much better to lose a dogfight :) I look forward to checking out your server tonight!
  2. Wow, all very interesting thanks.
  3. I was flying around in the F-5 last night, and took some damage - the TACAN and airspeed indicator stopped working. Luckily, I knew the direction to my airbase so lack of TACAN wasn't a big deal. I was worried about my landing speed though - I find it tricky to judge. But then I noticed that the AOA indicator was still working. This was a surprise to me. Without ever really thinking, I had just assumed speed was an input to the AOA, since it has lights to indicate "too fast" and "too slow". Now that I've thought about it, it seems reasonable that the AOA indicator only needs to know the angle of attack and rate of descent in order to function, since landing speed would be different depending on flaps, loadout, and possibly even the condition of the flight surfaces. Is this how it works?
  4. Hi. It might be a misunderstanding on my part, or a typo on yours, but the F-5E campaign needs the F-5E module, and not the F-15 module.
  5. I'm just starting to fly the MiG-21, and at first glance the MiG21 cockpit looks very similar to the MiG 23 cockpit. They even appear to have used the same interior designer and soft furnishings :) Would I be correct in thinking that the flight/systems principles are likely to be very similar? And even the startup procedures may have a lot of similarities?
  6. Hi, anybody know how to change the direction of travel for a ship e.g. in a trigger? Ships don't seem to have "Switch Waypoint" or "Goto Waypoint" commands. Can waypoints for ships be created or moved via lua scripts?
  7. Just dreaming... No matter what air combat simulations are around in 30 years time, I would think that the effort and detail that's gone into DCS will still have a huge amount of interest. Quite likely some of the modules we have now won't be available on any other simulation platform in that time. Today, old hardware and software systems are emulated. I wonder if in 30 years time, an emulation layer will allow modules from DCS to be placed into newer simulations? Imagine loading some descendant of DCS World in the year 2050, and flying the current DCS Harrier or Mig21. There'll be loads of nostalgia!
  8. I have Bandicam, although I haven't compared it to any other product. It's very easy to use, and doesn't seem to consume a lot of resources. (I have it set up to encode using the NVidia codec).
  9. I empathise with Chuck on this one. Looking back at the other Chucks Guides, even the guides for the Mig15/F86 (which have basically no electronic systems) were 60-70 pages long. I don't know how Chuck will even start a guide for a plane as complex as the Hornet. I assume it'll take significant time to produce. Having said that, I could do with it. I have managed a number of carrier landings, but none yet where my tyres survived. I think ED should find a new tyre manufacturer. Obviously the problem can't be the way I throw my plane at the carrier. <_< >_>
  10. OP, welcome! In a game like DCS, realism is important. Sometimes seems like realism is more important than entertainment :) Otherwise why would anybody be willing to sit waiting 8 minutes for a virtual flight computer to start up? Having said that... Female ATC voices - Yes please. I imagine there are plenty of female ATC personnel in the real world. Female pilot voices - Would be nice, but far less important, especially given the figure above that ~6% of military pilots are female. However I would welcome this if it did appear, so long as it stays realistic - I wouldn't think 50% pilots being female would be realistic. Female body model - who cares? Many people fly with the pilot model hidden. And as shown in another post above, the models are likely to look identical (or nearly so). I have no objection to the features that I think the OP is demanding. I just think the tone is all wrong and appears designed to provoke an angry reaction. This game/simulator has overall the nicest, most helpful players I've seen of any game. this is possibly related to the age profile of the players. There will be the occasional old-fashioned and unacceptable thing said, but I think polite admonishment would be better than dragging identity politics into things and trying to rally troops for a "cause". People playing DCS aren't trying to cause offense.
  11. There are also the DLC campaigns to consider. Some of the older modules have a great set of campaigns to fly. My favourite campaign was for the Sabre.
  12. I'm going to go a bit left-field here... I'd recommend the F86 as a first plane. You mentioned specifically enjoying the startup procedures, and I know the F86 is quite simple to start. However, you spend your time flying it rather than programming systems while it flies itself. Also, the DLC campaign for the F86 is the best I've played. From a multiplayer point of view, there's at least one server dedicated to Korea-era planes, which tends to mean plenty of Mig15/F86 encounters. They're close-up, personal, and evenly matched. No BVR stuff where you get taken out from miles away. Finally, in VR I find the most difficult things to read tend to be screens (e.g. MFDs) or panels with loads of similar-looking small-labelled buttons. The F86 is relatively clear in that regard. Whatever you choose, you're in for years of fun!
  13. I had almost all of the DCS modules before buying the Viggen. It just didn't appeal to me as a plane. I didn't find its shape particularly attractive. And that radar screen looks like it would give you sunburn. Not to mention the steampunk throttle. I ended up buying it in a moment of weakness after a few beers. I'm a convert. Primarily, it's down to the type of tasks a Viggen undertakes. I'm not much good at opportunistically spotting tiny fighters in the distance or vehicles/soldiers on the ground. That's an essential skill for most of the existing planes in DCS. The Viggen shifts the emphasis more to planned strikes. I know what my target is, and ideally avoid unnecessary contact with the enemy. The included campaign is short but has a mission that feels so immersive that I keep going back to it. It's exactly what the Viggen was made for in real life. I've even grown fond of the Viggen's aesthetics and the quality of its textures. It's ruined other modules for me - after flying the Viggen, some other modules' interiors look artificial and plasticy. And I was happy with those before! I should also mention that it's quick to start up, with enough systems to allow for accurate strikes, but few enough assists so you actually need to fly it. If anybody's on the fence, I'd recommend this module in a heartbeat.
  14. Very enjoyable campaign. I also find the issues above though. It's easy to taxi around the F5s, but I can't complete the mission without DCS crashing. Just in case it's of benefit, I attach the relevant portion of my log file below.
  15. Hi... I'm having trouble with mission 5 of the M2000 campaign. I can start up (despite the torch being very dim), change to Green channel 2, and I can hear the other pilot receiving clearance to taxi. I wait a minute, in case he needs to start moving before me. Then I start rolling too. Is that him to my left? He never moves. I've tried numerous times with minor adjustments, but always the same result. If this was a bug in the campaign somebody else would have seen it. It's probably something I'm doing wrong. Could anybody please advise? I have a .trk file below. https://1drv.ms/u/s!Auvq9HPqW3PAhDHOYcJq1iL8qjeH
  16. I must say, this is the best thing about the DCS community. I came here wondering why I was finding my canned mission difficult, and I end up understanding how disruptive the introduction of the B-52 must have been, and how worrying it would have been to any remaining Mig-15 units. Not to mention the pace of development back then. Thanks again!
  17. Another simulation tackles this by making all maps playable by everybody in multiplayer, even if you haven't bought them. However, if you haven't bought the map you can't play it in single-player mode and in multiplayer mode you're stuck with the basic planes.
  18. Thanks all. On the bright side, I probably did well to down the B52 at all. I see a mod to create a B29, so I might try it over the weekend... https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=140372
  19. Hi, I'm new to Soviet jets generally, and the Mig15 in particular, and looking for a little advice on realistic missions. I set up a little intercept mission, with the target being a B52. Is this a natural situation? I ask, because the Internets tell me that the wingspan of the B52 is 185ft, which translates to 56m However, the wingspan dial for the Mig-15 gyro sights only goes to 45m. Secondly, at 25000ft, the B52 seemed to be as quick as I was. I spent ages chasing him in a circle, 1-2km away, with me at maximum power. I eventually caught him somwhow, and downed him with a single cannon round. What power those cannons have! I know the Mig15bis appeared in 1950, slightly before the B52 in 1954, but wouldn't the Mig-15 have been Russia's primary defense against it? Or am I on the wrong path? Is there a more suitable/realistic intercept target for a Mig-15?
  20. I wish there was a way to shake my virtual fist at whoever shot me down :)
  21. The NTTR never really engaged me. I acknowledge that it's skillfully designed and artfully created. But it's a desert region; I live in a country that rarely sees a sunny day. Flying over a desert feels completely alien to me; I may as well be flying in Elite Dangerous over Mars. Secondly, it's a training range; that killed some of the immersion for me. But I'll be getting the Persian Gulf as soon as it's available. I'd rather a non-desert landscape, but I'm excited by the variation that we'll have with carrier- and land-based combat in a region that could realistically see skirmishes. (Also, despite my comments about desert landscapes, I think it's somewhat easier to see other planes against the ground - the variation in colour makes it more difficult in the Caucuses)
  22. Will there be an option to hide the control stick, so as to make the centre MFCD easier to see?
  23. I went with the non-Steam version. My reasons might not be valid for you, but here they are: 1. ED usually has earlier access to new modules and updates (although Steam is getting better now) 2. Steam sales are less often than ED discounts 3. Normal ED prices are cheaper than normal Steam prices (in my part of Europe anyway) 4. Non-steam DCS can still be added to the Steam launcher if desired Really I didn't see any advantage to sticking to Steam. Also, some of the older keys can be bought on Steam and transferred to the non-Steam DCS. But even then, there's rarely an advantage to doing that.
  24. I can't get over how much we are allowed to know about the F-35. Videos on Youtube; pictures of the cockpit (I wish those screens flip around to expose "real" gauges :) ); articles about its weaknesses. Whatever happened to cold war secrecy? I was amazed to read that the F/16 and Hornet were first deployed in the early 1980s. That's around 30 years ago. The first simulation of the F/16 that I considered realistic was Falcon 4 in 1999. The delay may be due to the speed of evolution of consumer-level technology rather than the lack of publicly available information on the F/16 before that. If the latter, then we probably can't expect an F-35 module in DCS for another 20 years. Given the multinational aspect to the F-35, I wonder if sufficient information will be available in coming years to allow reasonably accurate simulation?
×
×
  • Create New...