Leaderboard

That didn't take long, did it? The F-15 RPM guages only read approx 103% with full AB. (already reported) Those guages read "PRM" instead of "RPM" The TAS in the radar display shows IAS. (reported when demo came out)

OK so i begin flying in multiplayer thinking there might be some improvements!!! My question what the hell is all the stuttering from the other planes in 1.1!! I see planes around me go from right beisde me to about 500 feet away...the stuttering is constant but it gets really bad at times. ANYONE KNOW what this is???? or how to fix it??!!

Over there. <----

Sorry for making you wait. Had to stay in hospital for some time. I'll read and answer all emails sent to webmaster and team to lockon.ru And also read and answer every single post here. But, guys, I need time for it :). ED

What about thermal clutter? And isn't there a specific time that vehicles heat up/cool down to roughly the same temperature as the ground around it? I forgot what that was called, but a LLTV EO sensor would probably be a better bet. Interesting site here: http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomb7.html So, maybe ED can implement this feature? Furthermore, all my sources consistently state that the AGM-65B has twice the magnification of the AGM-65A, not 1.5X. And according to Designation Systems.net, the AGM-65G does have a longer range than the AGM-65D, but this is due to software improvements that allow the seeker to pick out targets at longer ranges. Physically, its almost 200 lbs heavier, but I'd imagine that the Mav can fly further than its seeker can track. And, according to Raytheon's website, regarding the seeker of the K compared to the A/B: @ SK What? I thought the whole point of this discussion was that it was *undermodelled.* I mean, fine, if TV Mavs can lock onto targets at night, that's a bug that should be fixed, but the capability of its seeker currently still leaves a lot to be desired. What I'm trying to get at is, I think that the lock on range of the K should be extended, but not to the level of the -D's. Three miles is far too low IMO for the -K. I'll go through my Airpower and International Airpower Review journals and see what I can find.

No problem. I've done it. :cool: EDIT: File deleted

I think it has to do with minimum aircraft avoidance distance. My takeoff height 90m for the Su-25T at Krasnodoyoe With 12:00 mission start, I set up 3 waypoints for my transport(An-26B). WP0) 11:59:55 Ht:110m Speed 300 WP1) 12:00:00 Ht:105m Speed 300 WP2) 12:03:00 Ht:110m Speed 300 When I put WP0 just above the Su-25T(runway start NOT icon), it climbs and then sinks back to the required level. That's your avoidance. When I place WP0 further down the runway, it glides smoothly the way you want it to. Also remember that the different Transports have different minimum heights An-26B 105m IL-76 150m After testing for the AN-26B - .30km is enough horizontal distance between WP0 and the SU-25T exact takeoff position to have a normal looking "takeoff" - vert difference of 15m for the IL-76 - that minimum height of 150m was sooo overpowering, it made no horizontal distance safe enough - vert difference of 60m. It all looks weird because it.

Good question. The "weight" of an explosive is often measured in equivalent TNT explosive power. I'm not sure if that's what's happening here but it may be that the new warhead actually weighs the same, it just uses a new explosive filler with more punch. AFAIK the new warhead is not a shaped charge. I think it would surely disable a tank, but maybe not actually penetrate its armor. It is designed to penetrate concrete. -SK

It is true; the issue here is that the parent aircraft undoubtedly communicates which target it is to look at after launch, whereas in LOMAC this isn't happening. The ARH's are radar silent until they get within 'optimal killbox scanning' range ... the problem here is that in LOMAC the ARHs grab whatever they want, whenever they want it, instead of diong 'snap looks' in the direction of the chosen target(s) or searching the target's killbox should the target be lost. It's an issue with how seeker logic is programmed, no doubt.

Wao! It's getting better and better! Again, I made it LoMan compatible. :icon_wink EDIT: File deleted

Finished Oktyabrskoy AFB. Download mission-file here: http://home.planet.nl/~monfro/666th/lomac-missions/trees.mis In order to see the trees on all the airbases you should copy/rename the following files in the ...lockon\bazar\terrain\structures\high folder: Backup folder lockon\bazar\terrain\structures\high if not done so before. Delete files: WC.cmd Konteiner_brown.cmd Konteiner_red1.cmd Konteiner_white.cmd Copy file Trees_375.cmd and rename the copy wc.cmd Copy file Trees_1.cmd and rename the copy Konteiner_brown.cmd Copy file Trees_1265.cmd and rename the copy Konteiner_red1.cmd Copy file Trees_375_375.cmd and rename the copy Konteiner_white.cmd Start lockon en have fun.

Sure it does. The cold war is over. Programmes are being cut. For a program to survive, it tries to cut costs. The way I see it, the USAF decided they have a lot more use for a high-magnification IR seeker on an anti-tank weapon like the AGM-65D, than on a bunker-busting weapon they can employ in the daytime against much larger, non-moving targets. Similarly, there are F-15Cs flying around today with 1970s-technology APG-63 radars that were removed from decomissioned F-15As, because their higher-spec APG-70s were removed for use in the F-15E fleet. It happens. It sounds hard to believe - the only advantage I ever heard of for EO over IR is lower cost. Can you back up your thought with a reference? -SK

lost my train of thought. Be back tomorrow....

I've done my fair share of reserch on SF before i buy this product. It does work in a way that it "hijacks" ide channels. If then it is taking over your hardrive IDE everytime that call is sent for virtual ram you could get a stutter. This delay could also effect the overall performance thru the agp bus and latency cyle. Perhaps people with 2 gigs of ram and no pagefile arent getting the stutter but people with lower ram may have it when it swaps to virt ram. But, why it's not happening in single player I dont have an answere for unless multiplayer is hitting the system just that little bit harder. (And we all know it does.) Just a theory of mine but I'm no pc expert nor a starforce rep. But there has to be a reason for it.

Well it is definately related to the program dealing with being online, as tracks recorded in studdering multiplayer sessions look mostly fine when reviewed. And like I said some value is being fed into the machine, I'd guess interpolation calculator as adjusting ping period has an affect, and this bit of code is either eatting up loop cycles or just plain telling the plane to make radical corrections rather than subtle ones.

Yep, once your rep rating reaches 100, you are concidered too wise/nice and you are banned automatically :cool: j/k

Угу, это щютка юмора, да? ГП. Скорость 750, высота 900-920. С дуру дернул ручку выпуска шасси (промахнулся). Замигал красный индикатор. Все! Баста! Сколь после не дергал ручку, пофигу. Шасси не выходили.

Just my feeling about this!!!!! Why is it that ED is not, posting to any of our post about the stuttering? Do they know about it and just want to ignore the problem? Or the know about it and are trying to fix it? All of the pilots in the Vert Thunderbirds have been spending night and day to try to get it where we can fly like we did in 1.02 but with the stuttering we cant. It's not a Hardware thing, so whats is going on.... I love lock on esp before 1.1 but I thought 1.1 was going to be the best with all the talk about it thru the web site here and abroad. But all I see is that I wasted $35.00 on something that is not flyable. I have an Alienware system, Very Very High End system... One of the best for the money. So If 1.02 was so rock solid why is 1.1 like it is. Why the change to all LUA files? What was changed that would cause a Host not to see the stutter but the client to see it? Was 1.1 tested with starforce before release? Was 1.1 tested in close formation like the VFTC & the Virt ThunderBirds Fly? Or was it just tested for Combat. If you by chance just for combat, then that was not a good choice.... lots of people use lockon for formation flying, Just alone on one week we had 10,000 hits to our web site and about 20 people going out to buy Lock On just because they have seen videos like ours. So It looks like that the Vert Thunderbirds are doing Ed a favor and making more sales for ED on 1.1, but here we sit with just a hope and a prayer that someone will atleast answer our posts, instead of asking someone to fix their sig on the fourms!! All we ask is some info in this subject, hell everyone else is getting answers to their questions, but us! Dont think that is good for both ED nor for the people that are waiting for the purchase of 1.1, Many people waiting for 1.1 to go on sale again said they were not going to get it till the see some type of a fix for the stutter! Do you blame them? I dont, I kick my self for running out and Downloading it on first release, I schould have waited a little longer! But Ed got my money, With no answers to our posts, I believe that ED is just saying we got your money and leave us alone!! But enough said! All we ask is for some answers and a fix thats it! Thanks for you time Mike "Cinch" Perry

The balance icon on the left lower side of an user.

netsettings I know many ppl will think its bullshit, but try putting ur netspeed down in \FlamingCliffs\Config\network\config.lua... like this: -- This file was automagically generated. Edit with care. :) gameTimeout = 10; pingPeriod = 3; maxPacketSize = 500; playerName = "Yourname"; idleTimeout = 120; stats { enable = true; file = "Temp/mp_log.txt"; }; chat { height = 95; log = true; delay = 10000; }; serverFiles = { [1] = "./Bazar/Names.lua"; [2] = "./Bazar/Racks.lua"; [3] = "./Bazar/Types.lua"; [4] = "./Config/Weapons/Guns.lua"; [5] = "./Config/Weapons/DrawInfo.lua"; [6] = "./Config/Weapons/Bombs.lua"; [7] = "./Config/Planes/Pylons.lua"; [8] = "./Config/Planes/Damage.lua"; [9] = "./Config/Planes/AIControl.lua"; [10] = "./Config/Export/Export.lua"; [11] = "./Config/View/Server.lua"; [12] = "./Config/View/Labels.lua"; [13] = "./Config/World/World.lua"; }; configList = { JaBoG32 = { downstream = 11000; upstream = 11000; }; ["xDSL 128/128 Kbit/s"] = { downstream = 16000; upstream = 16000; }; ["xDSL 1024/128 Kbit/s"] = { downstream = 128000; upstream = 16000; }; ["Modem 56.6K"] = { downstream = 5000; upstream = 3000; }; ["LAN 10 Mbit/s"] = { downstream = 500000; upstream = 500000; }; ["LAN 100 Mbit/s"] = { downstream = 5000000; upstream = 5000000; }; ["xDSL 256/128 Kbit/s"] = { downstream = 32000; upstream = 16000; }; }; client { port = 10308; type = "JaBoG32"; server = "217.84.20.194"; serverList = { [1] = "217.84.20.194"; [2] = "217.162.225.132"; [3] = "66.165.113.50"; [4] = "70.25.211.213"; [5] = "217.162.224.125"; }; }; server { port = 10308; name = "LockOn Server"; maxPlayers = 32; type = "xDSL 256/128 Kbit/s"; interface = "All interfaces"; }; Helped me a little, didn't resolve it, but made it playable... Hope it helps you regards JaBoG32_Zillion

нет,база ставится такой ручкой спереди около илс.после откида гашетки появляются "усы" и внизу база цифрами ,вот этой ручкой устанавливаешь .... PS я щас в виннице прохожу влк,так что меня некоторое время не будет,но задавайте-спрашивайте,приету тогда отвечу.....

I was woundering about that. Im building a new mission with a lot of new building and such. The trees tweak seem pretty good, would improve the scenery thats for sure. But will the others joining in, see the trees as well? since your renaming one file to the other. Or will they see a bunch of wc??? I recon It would of, have been nice for ED to add the tree's as well in the selection of static object. Also Would of have been nice to add groups of static object, then just moved & place them around. Doing them 1 by 1 is a painfully long to do... But I guess its all worth while :tongue: Its better then nothing I guess. But I Luv It. Once Im done Sochi Adler & surroundings wont look the same. :icon_keel