oldcrusty
-
Posts
2420 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by oldcrusty
-
-
5 hours ago, Raisuli said:
...But there is something special about 800 knot overhead breaks.
... followed by 7G turn all the way till in-close (ok, 6 or 5G will do). 3 green just before the ramp. (Paddles jumping into the net.. still holding the pickle)
-
I guess this is supposed to be an improvement. Instead of ships popping into view at extremely close range they 'zoom in'. Anyone else noticed?
It looks weird in VR in low level flight over water.
-
20 hours ago, H60MTI said:
You change the RCS and SIZE of the target on the 120's? Don't know that plays a roll with the radar at all or if it's just the missiles seeker...
I don't. Currently I have a more arcadish approach to all this stuff. Cross section, rotating blades, hot or cold... I maddog everything lol.
-
1
-
-
Also, check fuel flow or thrust in each motor. Even a tiny difference will pull to one side over time or make you bank.
-
1
-
-
I've only tested this over PG map (flat desert area). I recorded 7 high G turning fights (DACM - ace level AI) and all of the recordings were accurate!
My graphics settings are quite high... although I use only 2xMSAA w/ .6 sharpening (net effect is better then just MSAA) Is it MT doing a better job?
-
-
-
Straight and level over PG map... finally remembered there were other maps then Syria
-
I simply put my 'in-cockpit' volume to 85. Everything else at a 100 except music
-
On 12/26/2023 at 2:09 PM, CBStu said:
In the past it seems I have had reasonable success with 9Xs while 120Cs never work. But in the last couple days they don't seem to work very well. I have a hard time judging distance from another aircraft but I swear, by the time I get the tone that the 9X has found the chopper, I could dang near use the gun. I have been shot down by choppers using some kind of missiles so I don't like getting that close.
In the latest OB, mad dog 120 takes the cake by far in my experiments. I had AWACs D/L'd so I kept my nose cold. Once I saw the 'dot' (NO, NOT the NEW DOT
) I really focused on keeping tally and when within range I let 1 or 2 120s go. Splash every time. I placed an ace MI28 (armed) at low alt in my tests. In couple of engagements I used my radar only and was able to pick the helo up. He was flying at 90kts but... as soon as knew I was heading for him we went into notch and rapidly repositioned upwards. In my first fight I lost tally and got smoked with his guns since I decided to casually loiter looking around for him, bad idea! In the following fights I new what to do and sent a Spamram or two in time.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, rob10 said:
What Harker said, and with the computing power they would have had when F-18 was 1st designed it would probably have been easier to leave it the same than make it change anyway.
I'm OK with leftover decorations. As I mentioned in my previous post the HARM OVR in A/A mode is actually 'active' in current OB. We can change the on/off status without any visual feedback ( a BOX). You can see it changed by switching to A/G mode.
-
9 hours ago, Tholozor said:
HRM OVRD is forced off in A/A Master Mode, this is intentional so the pilot can use HARMs in Self-Protect without switching modes.
So cluttering up the stores display in A/A with unnecessary options is also intentional? If HARM's SP mode is not forcing any displays on DDIs in A/A why even show OVRD option there?
-
To add more to this fun, currently I can change the status of HARM OVRD from A/A mode... just doesn't show it there. It's always unboxed in A/A but if you press it and switch to A/G, you'll see it changed so why not show the 'box' in A/A also?
-
I'll be damn, I always thought that this was related to keeping your current selected steerpoint unchanged when flipping through different waypoints on DATA page and or editing them. If REFWP is unboxed, every time the up/down arrow is pressed the current steerpoint is changed to whatever is selected on DATA page.
Just checked how it works here and looks like you're right... I think.
-
I saw the thread title... how timely. Just made my glorious return to carrier aviation on YT
90 kts down the angle. Let's see what a fixed, linear bump through 1600ft would be, hehe. Well, if that's the only way to create a cool pitching deck so be it
https://youtu.be/JaUz6SHokBw?si=-hN3D_kH_cH5yJZq
-
2
-
-
Glorious return to carrier ops...
-
1
-
-
On 12/21/2023 at 4:17 AM, Branimir76 said:
When using Snake eye and Air ballute (Y) i noticed that CCRP always drops like they are set to "RET". So if you drop in FF mode, bombs fall well past the target.
here are tacviews with FF and RET modes.
Tacview-20231221-125946-DCS-Test-PG.zip.acmi 70.34 kB · 6 downloads Tacview-20231221-130218-DCS-Test-PG.zip.acmi 80.01 kB · 4 downloads
Put it in the bugs forum. Thanks for beta testing...
-
On 12/20/2023 at 7:55 PM, oldcrusty said:
13900K on win11... I don't even try to get 'scientific' with this thing but out of curiosity I decided to have a peek at HWmonitor with ST running in VR and I saw all pcores at 5.6 with roughly evenly distributed loads running cool as a cucumber (whatever the heck they were running on top of DCS, lol) and all ecores were idling at 4.something. I think I'll go back to ST for a bit and see what happens. I didn't really have major issues with MT in single player other then some weirdness after shutdown with my rig just resisting to completely power down.
and glitches with my Reverb G2's USB connection after running DCS (probably something with microshaft's WMR)
OK, after flying a few missions in ST... back to MT. On my rig MT definitely wins.
-
Fine, I won't cry
Whatever I get it's not going to be dependent on meta or any other mandatory 'ping' crap
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Hiob said:
Just to be clear. The clock that a core is running at says nothing about how loaded it is. You can have a core running at max. clock and basically doing nothing. How much workload a core actually stems can be seen by how much power it draws. Which very much depends on the task that is running and the instruction set it is using.
Sure, I had all pulldowns opened up, volts, temps, LOADs and the rest.
-
13 hours ago, twistking said:
maybe the devs could also have a look how 13th/14th gen intel and windows11 thread director handle DCS MT. I must admit that this is getting into territory i do not fully grasp, but just from seeing a 14770k running full tilt at 5.6ghz on a near empty mission @ 45fps VR and still saturating one core to 100% load, seems to indicate to me that there is more running on that core than it should.
Especially if you compare that to my own CPU (which i bought in 2009 !!!) which runs the same mission at higher detail setting (but no VR) at locked 60fps while also hosting said mission.*edit* tested on stable branch!
13900K on win11... I don't even try to get 'scientific' with this thing but out of curiosity I decided to have a peek at HWmonitor with ST running in VR and I saw all pcores at 5.6 with roughly evenly distributed loads running cool as a cucumber (whatever the heck they were running on top of DCS, lol) and all ecores were idling at 4.something. I think I'll go back to ST for a bit and see what happens. I didn't really have major issues with MT in single player other then some weirdness after shutdown with my rig just resisting to completely power down.
and glitches with my Reverb G2's USB connection after running DCS (probably something with microshaft's WMR)
-
Yep, seems like they changed it, both AUTO and CCIP.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Aluminum Donkey said:
Tell that to NVCP
AD
Hehe, I'm all on 'global' now :/
-
Shooting helocopters w/ ???
in DCS: F/A-18C
Posted
Of course, of course... you knew this one was coming :D