Leaderboard

http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/xp/radeonx-xp.html EDIT: Here is the link for Catalyst 7.4 with CP (classic Control Pannel) if you wish to try them out (The issue with AA/AF not working on standard 7.4 is solved in there for me): http://www.ngohq.com/news/10471-ati-catalyst-7-4-control-panel.html

Друзья! Братья и сестры! В виду периодически возникающих споров, особенно на фоне спора о вулче в онлайне, хочется все же спросить, а что для вас ЛокОн: прежде всего игра, в которую играют, расслабляясь после работы, и соответственно, допускающая значительные упрощения, при которых реализм уступает место, если можно так выразиться, драйву, или же вы видите в ЛО серьезный симулятор, наиболее подробно моделирующий реальность из имеющихся современных предложений на рынке, и вы готовы по 5 минут тратить только на то, чтобы запустить двигатели на старте, не говоря уже про прочее?

The officer then can gain to an Academy. Commonly if the officer don't graduate from it he never be a colonel. So the Soviet/Russian military education system is two-levels system.

I fed it the default data that NASA supply as part of the F100 engine description. When I went back to check the numbers, it seems NASA are actually modelling the engine as a turgojet rather than a turbofan - it's not using any bypass ratio at all. The real thing has a small bypass ratio (0.36:1 according to Wiki), so it's not a BAD approximation, but there's an error right there :P Anyways - current NASA model. Compressor: 14 stages Pressure ratio 20.4:1 Efficiency 0.959 Burner: No pressure losses. Efficiency 0.984 Turbine: 4 stages Efficiency 0.982 It's eating 17748 kg of Jet A an hour, at 99.164 kg/s airflow. Will try and duplicate it in the Turbofan model and see what it says this time around - I think the software's limited to using movable inlets on turbojets, but since we're running at sea level and no forward speed it shouldn't matter.

Byben Аналогично. :thumbup: Неплохо было бы юнитов добавить...

Oh my bad. Its not a camo version. Im going to make it camo tho! :)

Cryin' shame. I flushed a dead goldfish down the toilet last week. I had to weigh it down with toilet paper to get it to go down the hole. In the end..I felt better.

It bothers me that the "0.5 minutes" claimed on the Dash-1 climb chart is regardless of aircraft weight - and this grossly approximate and obviously unreliable number makes up 30% of the proof. Meanwhile, my opposing finding is using a reference measured accurately to the individual second and pound, and over a more tightly defined altitude band, where errors have less chance to "smooth out" by averaging. I do believe that ED used the best data that was available when the F-15 SFM was first developed. However, I don't believe that the Dash-1 climb chart can any longer be considered the best reference for our purposes today. To say that we did the best we could at the time, and nothing can be done about it now, and ED is working on Black Shark - I would agree, and am happy to drop all argument about the F-15 performance. But to say that the Lock On F-15 is producing the correct thrust, and the Dash-1 climb chart is proof of that, and the Streak Eagle records are less useful than the Dash-1 climb chart - it's a belief I had myself in the past, and was forced to reject by the evidence. I invite anyone to reconsider. Kuky, I rep you for your independent experiment. But - what was your speed, at 25,000 feet? -SK

Addendum: To remove increased drag from AoA let's look at the point in my track where the plane is vertical and AoA is 0. That is 3400 feet @ 219 KTAS. EngineSim gives a net thrust of 25,747 lbs per engine and that speed/altitude. The plane has burned 404 lbs of fuel at that point and has a net weight of 34,522 lbs. compared to a net thrust of 51,494 lbs. Drag at that speed and altitude is less than it was in the earlier calculation which still leaves a LOT of excess thrust. (~15,000 lbs) Yo-Yo?

But he doesn't have to wait unless he plans to exchange half of his computer. He has an AGP motherboard so the strongest ATI card would be the X1950 Pro (AGP version). The strongest AGP card from Nvidia would be the Gainward 7800GS GS+ (it's 7900GT card actually with 512 MB RAM and a possibility to overclock to levels of 7950GT or more). If he plans on waiting for the new ATI cards, he'll need a new motherboard which most probably also means a new CPU and RAM plus a new PSU.

hey guys, i need your help. I want to ask Oleg from the zmodeler forum to test for himself if it can be converted. Do i just simple send him the F-15.lom in C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\Eagle Dynamics\Lock On\Bazar\World\Shapes folder? Because walmis did a lot updates, and im not entirely sure which files are required to set up it in zmodeler and 3dmax.

I've just done a few tests myself with F-15 loaded with 28% fuel which gives it 14499kg or just over 31900lb gross weight. Started on the runway... hit SHF/BSP to show framerate and time counter... hit full afterburner... took of without flaps... keep it level to about 450/470mph (just under Mach 0.6 at sea level) and I managed to climb to just about 25000ft in 1min by doing 2.5G Immelmann (the way its noted on that first post/image). I think this 1min being 4sec over 56sec of the record test is alright estimation because the bult in framerate/timer starts counting right after I start the mission and there is about 3 sec delay till engines are in full afterburner (because engines start idle) so this 1min compensates for it. I think the test you have conducted is flawed :music_whistling: