Leaderboard

Rokosowsky, I think there something fundamental about military acquisitions, logistics and reality you do not understand. Of course everyone will agree with you that sending aircraft without proper ECM equipment against ANY enemy forces with SAM capabilities is far from being ideal. Regardless if the opposing forces are Chinese, NATO, Russian or what ever. I thing most of us, including moderators and developers, understood your point and, for the most part, even agreed with you. Sending these aircraft in areas covered by SAM is not ideal. It is not safe. You are right. Best course of action will always to keep the aircraft out of danger until the SAM threats can be neutralized. The reality is in fact (and that's especially the case during a military conflict) far from the ideal picture-book theory. Rules change and need to be flexible. Do aircraft without ECM equipment go into dangerous areas? I'm pretty sure they have to, because you don't always have any alternatives. There are some conflict areas where you would see Canadian helicopters with bullet holes patched with duct tape. That's not ideal. That's not safe, but it had to be done. In short, my point is that even if you do think that all modern military aircraft should be equipped with proper ECM equipment (and again, you are probably right), it doesn't change the reality that not all modern military aircraft have this luxury. Nor does it change the fact that they may be used in situations where SAM threats are possible. It all comes down to a question of budget, logistics, politics, ever lasting upgrade schedules, etc. That the life of military development. I'm not familiar with Russian programs, but I'm fairly sure that once an upgrade program starts, it could easily take a decade to see any changes on the aircraft. Nothing is plug-n-play in the military world. Changes are slow. Finally, I think you should take some time to review your attitude. You are clearly pulling out the smart ass act I've seen a bit too often around the internet by now. I'm sure it served you well in other situations, but here you are talking with a group of developers who, clearly, put a lot of effort into research and documentation. Their argument is simple. They basically said, "we do not have any information describing these systems for the Ka-50, hence we didn't model any". On a simulator where realism is the key, their approach is a valid one and hardly deniable because, to the best of their knowledge, it's right. I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this :s If you have serious information to provide, go ahead. But again, don't start babbling about this or that other aircraft that has the system or how much it would be nonsense to use the aircraft without it or even that it has been tested. All those facts that may be true or not do not provide any useful information on the state of the fleet of Ka-50 at any point in time. Even if you are right, the information you provide is not enough to conclude in the context of a realism-based simulator. EDIT: corrected few obvious typos

Kamov Ka-50 "Black Shark" Checklist Fairchild Republic A-10C "Warthog" checklist can be found here : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=55949 I created 2 versions now of the Normal Checklist : - Normal Checklist (Beginner) This is the checklist as I started out, with keyboard and position columns for the beginner. - Normal Checklist (Pro) This is the same format/layout as a reallife professional checklist, it has no switch locations or keyboard shortcuts in it. This adds to the reality effect and can be used if you know where the switches are. :lol: Eventually you should be using the Pro checklist ofcourse. =-) Download: Normal Checklist (Beginner) Normal Checklist (Beginner) v2.1.pdf Normal Checklist (Pro) Normal Checklist (Pro) v2.1.pdf Probably the best thing is to print it out using 2 pages per side so one page has A5 size. Changelog: ************** Normal Checklist Version 2.1 ************* Stopped/Running engine temp gauge test figures added. ************** Normal Checklist Version 2.0 ************* Item location panels now correspond to the manual so beginners can find the items easier. Several items renamed to correspond to in game labels. ************* Normal Checklist Version 1.9.1 ************ Typo fixed thanks to ddahlstrom ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.9 ************* Fixed Fire Suppression mode label to OPER instead of WORK Moved Cyclic/Rudder/Collective Movement check before setting engines to Auto throttle, this way it is the normal way to check, not when the engines are in flight power, checking collective movement would cause the a/c to lift off. ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.8 ************* Fixed error in ground power key assignment, thanks Nightshadow81 ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.7 ************* Removed "Targeting Navigation System ON" as it is for ground/maintenance purposes ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.6 ************* Fixed a error, "INU Heat" first then "INU Power ON" ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.5 ************* Added Hot Refuel/Rearm Checklist During Shutdown checklists set Parking Brake First to prevent a/c movement in high wind conditions ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.4 ************* Added Collective Low Check before engine startup Added Governor L&R Off in shutdown checklist ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.3 ************* Some minor errors corrected Made a Pro & Beginner version Pro has no keyboard shortcuts and location columns ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.2 ************* Some errors corrected Items added that I missed Some orders changed (allthough in game the order doesn't seem to matter) All keyboard assignments added ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.1 ************* Some minor changes/errors I found while using the checklist they have been fixed now. ************** Normal Checklist Version 1.0 ************* Initial release.

Simmod seeks texture artist to work on Nellis Project and future projects. The Candidates must able to - Use 3dsmax 7 or 8 - Able to Unwrap a model - Must be frequently online - Give work updates at least every 2 days - Make a simple box looks like a building photograph! - Understand Team work mechanics. All Candidates must download the sample model here. The sample model must be unwrapped and textured until January 26th at the latest. Finished work must be compressed to rar or zip formats. File's name must be the candidates callsign and compressed file must contain, max file and texture. All finished files can be uploaded to any online file hosting service. The download address can be posted at this post or can be PM'ed to "Yeniceri" We are looking forward to work with you! Good luck to all.. So why would you want to sign up? Because you will be part of a great experience and leave your mark in the gaming industry. You can look back and say "hey I did that" while everyone enjoys playing something YOU created. Plus (my favorite) you get to play with all the new stuff before it gets released ;). So if you have the skills and time, please sign up. We judge how well your work is and you might be part of a great team. Good hunting!

Hey Community, Finally I managed to upload my movie as a HD-Version on Youtube: BE SURE TO CLICK ON HD! And here's the story: It was a nice but cold winter evening, when suddenly the alarm jolted me out of my arousing daydreams. Intelligence reported, that the Georgian Army sent several speedboats and cruisers to board our not half-manned aircraft-carrier to get hold of highly classified material. Now it was on me, Ivan Smirnoff, to jump into my KA-50 and interfere with the Georgian plans. While I powered up my Blackshark the enemy ships already launched a couple of missiles to destroy our cruiser. But defense was strong enough. One ship-to-ship missile was even able to sink one of the enemy speedboats. I flew to the location where our intelligence suspected their position. A single speedboat was left and I was able to destroy it. Returning to our territory, I had a short stop on one of our cruisers. During this refueling stop, I visited the commando centre, observing our fleet’s confrontation with the rest of the Georgian ships. Our ambush finally led them to give up and retreat behind their border. It was time to return to our base and get back to this wonderful daydream. Ivan Smirnoff

Работает. :smilewink: Ну у вас и фантазии.. :)

Hi Vault, Don't worry about being 'difficult', some of like an honest debate ;) re: why F3 can look better on Xbox than PC is for two reasons... (a) Xbox hardware is fixed and its drivers for that hardware are fully known. By that I mean, programmers can provide very accurately to squeeze the very best out of the various shaders available to the gfx card/driver. In many recent games on Xbox you will see much more use of HDR lighting (High Dynamic Range I think it means), which means you get 'bloom' and 'glare' lighting effects. (b) PC games are designed to get quite alot out of the various shaders available and have to consider you might be running a DirectX 8 card, DX9a/b/c or DX 10 card. Moreover, quality/performance is also affected by what gfx options the user chooses to enable, what compromise between resolution versus gfx settings they may/may not make...and what driver version for what card is being used. So...its perfectly possible for a game to look better on Xbox versus PC...but there are many many factors and in every case it should be possible for a PC game to look better as we have more control over the factors affecting look/feel/performance (e.g. AA, AF, resolution, texture quality etc). Ok, lengthy answer...but its not that something is a dedicated device but any edge on performance/difference can be atrributed to a console being a fixed asset that can be coded for/around whereas PCs cannot due to the plethora of options of hardware/driver. Again, don't be shy about a healthy debate...you should have seen some of the previous posts concerning ECM jamming and missile performance in the old LOFC days (ducks for cover :D) - now those were high temperature ;)

Pegasus too!

Why in the world would anyone want to see such a complex and deep simulation "dumbed down" for an 8-button gamepad? Unless you have a budget PC or one that is several years old, there's no way the XBox360 should outperform a PC. I would hate to see ED start catering to the console crowd. Their games would suffer for it, just like UBI and many more, and they would likely alienate the hardcore sim fanbase in the process. Simply including a game mode in Black Shark gave me dry heaves.

another problem with consoles is the lack of controls. If you look at the Ka-50 layout, we have a sh*t load of combo keys, ctrl, shift, alt...etc. So unless xbox can expand its keys function, PC is the best way to go. Economic factors also play into the equation, there's simply not enough market for a serious flight simulator game in the console world. Everyone wants to play those "shoot em up" types of games like Ace combat or HAWX. Only real men stick to simulators ;)

...and please release it on nintendo ds and gameboy!

It reminds me one of Murphy's law: If you are short of everything except enemies, you're in combat.

That's my fault. I apologize. I promise I'll hush after this one last response. ;) Hey maybe a mod will split this into two threads! (I'm always looking for technical solutions to social problems. :P ) Easily? What's your version of "easy"? I spent many years working on Apaches, and putting Stingers on them would have been lots of things, but "easy" wasn't one of them. ATAS was mounted on the OH-58A/C aircraft, and no thought was ever given to putting them on Apaches. Ever. Dowload a copy of the AH-64A Operator's Manual and see how many times it mentions "ATAS" or "Stinger". I'll give you a hint. It ain't in there. There's a reason for that. Chaff were routinely carried. Flares were never, ever carried. And by never I don't meant sometimes or rarely. I mean the cockpit switch says "chaff", not "chaff/flares". Just because it's the same dispenser doesn't mean they carried both. In fact... The general purpose dispenser M-130 (fig 4-20) consists of a dispenser control panel located on the right of the pilot instrument panel (fig 2-9), a dispenser assembly, a payload module assembly, and an electronic module to dispense M-1 Chaff. It provides effective survival countermeasures against radar guided weapons systems. The dispenser subsystem has the capability of dispensing 30 chaff cartridges. That's right out of the Operator's Manual. I'd say that's pretty definitive. Oh, and this... The countermeasures control panels (fig 4-20), located on the right side of the pilot instrument panel, consist of the radar/infrared countermeasures panel, the chaff dispenser panel and the radar signal detector control panel. The flare panel is not used. I'm very aware of both of those crashes. One crash was caused by settling with power. Thankfully, it was a relatively short fall and both pilots walked away with relatively minor injuries. The other was caused by an erroneous, uncommanded flight control input from the BUCS during NOE flight, causing the aircraft to enter a severe roll, from which the crew was unable ot recover before impacting the ground. Both pilots were killed. Both incidents occured at night, but neither had anything to do with the night-flying capabilities of the aircraft.

Hi all, I have to totally aggree on this statement. Although I started this thread by complaining about NVG being useless, I must apologize as I missed some important brightness control features in the cockpit, most important of it being the gain control knob of the NVG, hidden behind the cyclic and as such totally ignored by me. :doh: (I did read the whole manual but my brain is getting old). So I realised that NVG starts initially with maximum gain set, making ABRIS, HUD and TV screen unreadable. Once the different lightings and gain controls correctly set, it's an absolute pleasure to fly by night or bad weather and the atmosphere in the cockpit is absolutely fantastic. Yes, this is definitively the best NVG rendering ever in a sim.

I popped on HL last night to see 8 people flying. At the same time of night prior to the release of 1.1, I don't remember one single night that had so few flying. Perhaps other old-timers could post their memories of HL participation back when 1.02 was the current release. Since Ice has accused me of not posting the truth, maybe some other folks could refresh his memory.

Тогда и я прошу не смеятся. Ето типа эскиз.Переименуйте в тотале на RAR Далее как обычно. :) bunker.trk

I already posted it in the Missing Designer Resource thread, but I think it would be worth to open a discussion about it here. Here is a website about comat helicopter tactics of the NVA (East German Army). As such it primary applies for the Mi-24 during the cold war. Unfortunately it is only in German. http://www.nva-flieger.de/html/taktik-arfk-angriffsmethoden.php There 4 basic attack tactics describerd: 1. Attack from horizontal flight (approach at very low level, climbing only slightly to aquire and attack). 2. Attack from a dive 3. Attack from a hover 4. Attack from a climb (new tactic in evaluation) Some interesting observations: -This proves that hovering in battle positions was a standard tactic of the WP. Actually it is described as the most suited tactic to engage stationary or mobile single targets, most suited to launch multiple weapons and most survivable against air defenses. Next to the attack from horizontal flight it is the only technique to employ ATGMs. Interestingly, ATGM precision is twice as bad as from the horizontal flight because of the unstabilty of the hover. -It is described that in large operations, cover groups had the specifc task of protecting the main body of helicopters (transports or attack helicopters) from enemy helicopter attack.

Yes, maybe somebody, somewhere, some time in the future will secretly install a RWR on a Ka-50. You can then enjoy that simulation. We'll stick to reality, where the Ka-50, like most other Russian combat helicopters including the Mi-24, does not have a RWR and Russian helicopter pilots - unfortunately - go to war without this valuable equipment.

Кто бы сомневался, что ВВП может сквозь гору...

Энциклопедия авиационных симуляторов Eagle Dynamics http//wiki.eagle.ru запущена.

This is quite tricky. Screenshot is early but this is the look I'm going for. Bare in mind that there will be paving to the bunkers too. This is just another test. The idea is that this is very heavily worn, the joints between the tiles have filled over time. Opinions, particularily on the join issue plz!

Officially it is limited by game engine, so I don't think so, but... who knows :D

Yes I would think so - but the initial Su-27S version of the mod will have no such requirement. They would if the situation called for it. The fact is that the R-73 can be loaded onto the aircraft at these positions, and if it is, requires the APU-73 for the purpose. Following that logic of yours, it doesn't matter if a FAB-100 is loaded onto an APU-470 rail launcher(lol) in the sim, because the Russian air force is rarely seen using a2g munitions for the Su-27. Thats just plain wrong. No but I was refering to you comment about it being a "waste" not to exploit the Su-27 entry to the fullest - I think it would be a waste to triplicate or quadruplicate the work load making nice Su-35 or Su-30MKI models when the reality is that these versions cannot be simulated remotely accurately in Lock-on.....whether using the Su-27 slot or not :) . Yes and I would also think weapon capability could be a problem online - i.e. if you use the Su-27 slot for an Su-35 then you would also need to include the weapons it can use - such as the R-77 - into the payload options. No I meant that there is an Su-27, an Su-27K, an Su-27PU and an Su-27IB in the game ;) . So if I wanted to make e.g. an alternative Su-30 variant avaliable I would use the Su-30 slot for the purpose - either replacing the original variant or doing what you suggest. As far as I can tell(been awhile since I tried) the Su-30 FM is not completely off the mark when made flyable. I am not speaking for 3GO, so I cannot say what they plan to do - I just made the racks mod for them. But you seem to think that they do things the way they do because they don't know any better, just as you apparently don't get what my racks mod is about. I doubt that they will regret anything - making a "polished" Su-27 with as little disruption to the sim as possible(including performance) seems to be exactly what they intended, which in turn is yet another good reason for making two versions of the Su-27 mod.

Правда, это бич TN матриц - малые углы обзорности как по вертикали, так и по горизонтали. Но с этим достаточно успешно борятся, внедряя новые технологии, поэтому современный ЖК-монитор с такой матрицей имеет достаточно большие углы обзора.

Ungauged, unanimated, unoptimized

:punk: NEW YEAR project