Leaderboard

Good evening. As usual in the world of IT projects, the initially scheduled development time has been multiplied per Pi to obtain the final result (x 3.14...). The requirement level of our testers, the amount of 3D models and skins, the new possibilities available with FC2 (compared to FC1), never stopped to increase our workload to finish the project. The more we did, the more remained to be done. To see the greatest aircrafts of the world fly in FC2 eventually took 4 years of development, thousands hours of modeling, skinning, integrating, coding, documenting, testing, brainstorming phone calls and hundreds of Coca Light bottles (yes, AdA Mod dev team does not drink coffees and try to take care of their health). Thus, we are extremely happy to (finally) announce the mod release for December 2011. In order to wait until then here follows the ReadMe of the mod: More news to come (really) soon. Barbs.

Flap gauge isn't custom made for the A-10, but rather COTS equipment. You get ten extra degrees of indication for free! A custom gauge would take eight years to develop, four years to procure, cost US$8 billion in dev budget (a bargain at only 120% over budget) and still lack indication of fully retracted condition due to an oversight in the specs. There would be outrage when the contract was won by a European company building it in Oregon, instead of by a US company building it in China... ;)

Совсем уже читеры прихерели, статус им подавай. Альфа, пока от кого-либо из вас не будет видозаписи полетов - все вы читеры, литающие без радаров. Да что там видеозапись, вы даже трек боитесь отослать.

Yes, the new smoke is in development...

My 100th ''ED forums'' post:yay:

Более-менее данный дефект устраняется предварительной калибровкой джойстика из под винды, а так, только приобретенный навык :joystick:

For the mission designers: The last couple of weeks I've been digging through field manuals and online resources to find info on "realistic" battalions/groups/platoons/batteries/... The result is a mission file with more than 30 different battalions, batteries, platoons,.... For the ease of deployment in missions, larger groups are divided in subgroups, so you can deploy a single platoon out of a battalion if you want. Most groups are just a line-up of all units needed in that group, so exact unit placement is up to you. Other groups are already placed in a setup like found in the online resources. Same goes for some subgroups. Different variants are available where appropriate. In infantry platoons, some of them have the soldiers themself in a separate group. Leave out if not needed, duplicate if more are needed. Obviously, DCS does not have all vehicules available that are needed to make it 1 on 1 realistic. So, non existing vehicules are replaced by simular units or left out. Used my imagination here. Also included, is a farp template, what allows you to place a group of vehicles that are outlining a farp structure if zoomed in completly in the editor. Handy to place the farp on a exact spot, or to place units on the farp. Once done, place the FARP structure itself on the central unit, which is another type for easy recognition. Download HERE. In the download are a .miz file what can be used to ad the groups to your own templates, a templates.lua file to simply replace your templates and a pdf with all groups in it. List: Patriot Battery Patriot Battery Firing Battery Patriot Battery SHORAD Patriot Battery Support Heavy Cavalry Troop Heavy Cavalry Troop Scout Platoon 1 Heavy Cavalry Troop Scout Platoon 2 Heavy Cavalry Troop Tank Platoon 1 Heavy Cavalry Troop Tank Platoon 2 Heavy Cavalry Troop Mortar Section Heavy Cavalry Troop Maintenance Section Heavy Cavalry Troop Headquarters Section Heavy Cavalry Troop Headquarters Section Heavy Cavalry Troop Fire Support Team   Light Cavalry Troop Light Cavalry Troop Scout Platoon 1 Light Cavalry Troop Scout Platoon 2 Light Cavalry Troop Antitank Platoon 1 Light Cavalry Troop Antitank Platoon 2 Light Cavalry Troop Mortar Section Light Cavalry Troop Maintenance Section Light Cavalry Troop Headquarters Section Light Cavalry Troop Fire Support Team Mechanized Infantry Platoon Mechanized Infantry Platoon HQ Mechanized Infantry Platoon platoon leader Mechanized Infantry Platoon Squad 1 Mechanized Infantry Platoon Squad 2 Mechanized Infantry Platoon Squad 3   Heavy Brigade Combat Team Fires Battery HBCT Fires Battery HQ HBCT Fires Battery Supply Section HBCT Fires Battery Firing Platoon HBCT Fires Battery Fire Direction Center HBCT Fires Battery Howitzer Section HBCT Fires Ammo Section Heavy Brigade Combat Team Armor Company HBCT Armor Company HQ HBCT Armor Company Tank Platoon 1 HBCT Armor Company Tank Platoon 2 HBCT Armor Company Tank Platoon 3   Heavy Brigade Combat Team Recon Troop HBCT Recon Troop HQ HBCT Recon Troop Mortar Section HBCT Recon Troop Recce Platoon 1 HBCT Recon Troop Recce Platoon 2 MLRS Battalion MLRS Battalion HQ and service battery MLRS Battalion MLRS Firing Battery 1 MLRS Battalion MLRS Firing Battery 2 MLRS Battalion MLRS Firing Battery 3   Stryker Brigade Combat Team HHC Infantry SBCT HHC Infantry HQ Section SBCT HHC Infantry Antiarmor Platoon SBCT HHC Infantry Command Section SBCT HHC Infantry fires support platoon SBCT HHC Infantry Retrans Section SBCT HHC Infantry Company HQ SBCT HHC Infantry Scout Platoon SBCT HHC Infantry Mortar Squad Stryker Brigade Combat Team Riffle Company SBCT Riffle Company Rifle Platoon SBCT Riffle Company Rifle Platoon 2 SBCT Riffle Company Mortar Section1 SBCT Riffle Company Mobile Guns System Platoon   Stryker Brigade Combat Team Reconnaissance Squadron SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Command Group SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Fire Support team SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Retransmission Section SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Troop HQ SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron NBC Recce Platoon SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Recce Platoon 1 SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Recce Platoon 2 SBCT Reconnaissance Squadron Mortar Section Soviet Tank Battalion T-72 STB72 HQ STB72 Tank Company 1 STB72 Tank Company 2 STB72 Tank Company 3 STB72 Supply Platoon   Soviet Tank Battalion T-80 STB80 HQ STB80 Tank Company 1 STB80 Tank Company 2 STB80 Tank Company 3 STB80 Supply Platoon Soviet Anti Tank Battalion SATB HQ SATB Anti tank company 1 SATB Anti tank company 2 SATB Anti tank company 3 SATB Supply Platoon   Soviet Mechanized Infantry BN (APC) SMIB APC HQ SMIB APC Rifle Company 1 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 1 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 2 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 3 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 4 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 5 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 6 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 7 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 8 SMIB APC Rifle Company infantry 9 SMIB APC Rifle Company 2 SMIB APC Rifle Company 3 SMIB APC Mortar Company vehicles SMIB APC Mortar Company mortars SMIB APC SAM Platoon SMIB APC Supply Platoon SMIB APC Signal Platoon SMIB APC AGL Platoon SMIB APC Antitank Platoon SMIB APC Recce Platoon

Hi all, Like i have already say http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=81293 , the graphic engine actually using for EVERY flight simulation are really bad for multiple reason, the worst (really bad for immersion cause that really have an important effect for visual flight) its the size effect, in EVERY flight simulator every object and terrain look small, the size impression make look like if we using RC model simulator, best exemple its here : http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=213301Screen111108001508.jpg Its supposed to be a BIG ship and that look like a small RC model ship, the problem its that the 3D model are good, really good with a lof of details, but that still make a bad size effect like that http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=192471Screen111108001501.jpg or like that http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=229628Screen111108001420.jpg in both of this screenshots i have try to make the biggest effect without be too close... And compare with that (i don't talk about graphic but size effect) http://img.jeuxvideo.fr/photo/02078176-photo-arma-2.jpg for every VFR flight size effect in actual simulator CAN'T be use at realistic way... Size effect its the first problem, second problem its the ground, ground complexity (terrain are flat and every mountain or relief its not rounded but its gross angle...The texture are horrible, we always see pixel of the ground, building are just a box with bad texture and bad size render, tree look like a paper tree with bad size effect too. Light effect are not perfect too, same thing for general effect like smoke, explosion, weather and more. Actual graphic engine have a BIG optimization problem, the worst example : When we flying inside BIG frog and we DON'T see any ground, 3D object or effect except maybe some nice frog effect on the wing (bugged with eyefinity) we have low FPS... And every problems i have say here its obtain with low FPS on the MOST POWERFUL actual graphic card... My conclusion : Graphic engine using for aerial simulation have a problem and its bad !!! I have hear a lot of response (look more like bad excuse for me) like : the size of the map and the visibility distance, ok but with maximum visibility distance setting, every simulator NOT reproduce real visibility distance and with the bad size effect its worst... And anyways I have already hear : the simulator need to calculate IA flight physic avionic and more, ok but its the CPU who calculate it and not the GPU and when we see how many IA are actually bad and really sucks ... Anyways the problem can be solved by only two way : REAL optimization of flight graphic engine cause actually a little part of full power of the graphic card (and all part of the computer too) are using and that still with low FPS and actually SLI and Crossfire don't work, for give to the simulator the possibility to show graphic like that : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8scXSG3hF3Y BUT in the FULL map and with correction of bad size effect, cause in this video its the most advanced graphic that i have ever see in simulation but when the camera its turning to the car, the truck and the copter, look how its unrealistic, that look small and immersion fail. For me the bad size effect coming from the fact that simulator reproduce what a camera see and not what human eyes see cause its not the same size effect, we are supposed to embody a pilot who see with eyes and not a camera and in DCS pilot body miss, mission information on the leg of the pilot its not eye candy cause if the simulator show mission objective briefing and other (like when we use escape in DCS) its important and that can improve immersion. Or second possibility its the CHANGE graphic engine politic of flight simulation and try to turn to other possibility. I have find a perfect graphic engine, its here : http://www.infinity-universe.com/Infinity/index.php Its a space combat game, well why its perfect for me ? Cause this graphic engine can show FULL PLANET, not only one time but a LOT of planet with different terrain (not the same using several time), possibility to show a lot of asteroid field like belt (asteroid ring) around several planet, at long range that look like a gas and when we coming close (like in real) we finally see that its a big asteroid field, the light effect and reflexion are perfect, physic are pretty nice, effect like smoke explosion and other are nice too, 3D model are nice, ground texture are nice and we DON'T see the pixel on the ground, its capable to show forest or BIG city with a lot of COMPLEX 3D building, ok that still with bad size effect but optimized for show only ONE planet, cause in 2 second the camera can, without lagging and in real time (not precalculate) coming from ground go to orbit and show full planet or show giant gas planet through the atmosphere or more, we can be able with the same graphic engine to obtain REALISTIC and almost photorealistic graphic engine capable to work without low fps on actual nice computer, example http://www.infinity-universe.com/Infinity/index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=90&catid=4 And the guy don't use a supercomputer for obtain this result. And before people who defending actual graphic engine told me "yeah but that work like that or like that and that do that and other bad excuse..." I don't care how that work, the important its : that work. And the result its pretty nice. And i challenge you to find only one thing that actual flight simulation graphic engine do that this super graphic engine can't do... Except size effect but its not optimized for human size. Its not optimized for flight simulation, its BETTER than that cause its optimized for space simulation/travel and extremely high speed of camera. For DCS if, like a lot of people ask, ED team just will make SDK every one who know using it and who want to do it (more than number of people of ED team i'm sure) can officially without asking money help ED, that want mean : ED can have more time for work on the more important things, correct bug and problems, optimize graphic engine (or change it and using DX11) and more and every people of community can make the rest, new 3D model, effect, texture and more and we finally could have EVERYTHING that we ask since LONG time and that ED will never do cause considerate like eye candy or useless or cause they not have the time but that we anyways want and make better and more rich simulation, maybe the best ever. And that can give better and big commercial argument cause fan made its always the best thing, and fan made + professional made/work can be extremely nice, think about it...

Special screen A-10C DCS part 3

TBH I as well think there's some misunderstanding, Viper. As Yurgon recapped it in post #54 in both trimming methods available one needs to re-center his non-FFB controls. If not re-centered: * CPTM on - game will not grant you any control until you do re-center (at least very near the center) * CPTM off - game will wait X seconds, and then will add the current player joystick position to the position of in-game trimmed controls Normally I would be like "WTF are you all re-discovering in this sorry thread" but your posts, Viper, got me, well, meybe not confused but certainly in need for setting things straight. As for the tracks - I don't have BS installed right now. I'd appreciate if you could point me to a video. You could always refer to my video here but then it covers the 'bump issue' which, supposedly, only I/few suffer from.

New flare visualization too? The current one is about 8 years old ;)

Наконец, сподобился сделать схему кампании со всеми взаимосвязями:

Confirmed and I haven't really solved it ever forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=58145&highlight=bump Normally I would advocate for slapping anyone talking about an individual flying style but with such issues present in dcs it wouldn't be fair.

вот не пойму немного ... зачем наводить суету изза 2х мелких полигончиков на TGP и отражений ... лично мне некогда любоваться видами по F2... в основном щщи воткнуты в мониторы МФЦД да будильники... ну и прочее... в конце то концов не любоваться красотами вылетаешь а выполнять боевую задачу ... и на предельной концентрации както уже не слишком парит отражается ли твоя макушка на колпаке и как там поживают два пикселя за спиной на TGP... уж если досконально копать то копать баги авионики, физики и вооружения ато прям простите как блондинки

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=49418

На NMSP передвинь тумблер PTR в положение ABLE

I just saw this on the russian part of the forums:

IMHO the Master Server system is a flawed concept conceived with the best of intentions, (based around continual intellectual protection of genuine copies by creating another security 'layer') but in execution is a complete failure. Get rid of it ED. 'T'

И у меня и у всех остальных есть эти кивки с самого начала. Я нашёл выход из положения - стал триммироваться не кратковременным нажатием на кнопку, а удерживая в нажатом положении, тогда всё срабатывает чётко. В кратковременном режиме триммироваться (точно) просто невозможно....судя по отзывам и во второй версии.

Ok, this is going to be confusing because i can't quote from the locked thread. Whatever, here goes: @Aaron: My point is not that the graphic engine is perfect, i know that the devs are playing catch up technology wise, but the approach that the OP proposed is extremely simplistic and therefore the results he expects are just not possible. Yet the discussion continued around 'why didn't anybody try this? I know that it works and yet it is so simple...' My response to that is: show me. A simple tuning of texture quality vs. draw distance can be done. If that is all that it takes, go for it. To be honest, i find it a little strange for somebody to think that he can waltz in here and educate people who are (probably) master or even PhD degree level software design engineers with 10 years or more experience in 3d engine development about how they should do their job. I'm not saying that keeping them on their toes isn't good and that we shouldn't demand solid work from them, but throwing around terms that have barely any meaning for the engine at hand like in bullshit bingo without actually understanding how the underlying technology works and what it's strengths and weaknesses are, that just doesn't cut it. If you want to talk the talk, be prepared to walk the walk. ;) We've been down that path often enough. :)

What he said, But times 3 Million. :pilotfly:

А через hamachi можно по сети в лок он играть. Если можно, то как? Заранее благодарен.

MWS however does not have magical knowledge about what is and what isn't a "missile". Have you ever had it go off due to an explosion on the ground below you, for example? I have. :) (Though I'm not the right person to say what things the real MWS would discriminate, lots of classified and noforn in those things I suspect.)

Sounds very exciting !!!! Any pics or previews?

Alpha jet! Alpha jet! Alpha jet!!! My favorite jet of all time finally gonna be flyable!!!! Can't wait thanks!!!

You don't have to use steerpoints at all. The A-10C's weapon system is centered on the concept of "Sensor Point of Interest", or SPI. Any guided weapon you employ will attempt to hit your SPI. The SPI can be generated by any of your "sensors", which includes your steerpoint, the HUD's TDC, the TAD's hook, the targeting pod, or the Maverick seeker. Just make sure your SPI is set correctly. You can see what your current SPI is in the bottom-left of the HUD; if you're using the targeting pod it'll say TGP. Viper's instructions are accurate, however it might also be worth mentioning that you need to set the master arm switch to 'armed' before you can deploy any weapons. If you're talking about "make a quick mark" as in creating a mark point and then dropping on that, there's a few more steps, but it's not necessary. Just use the TGP until you're comfortable with the symbology and procedure, and then other methods of designating your target will fall into place. Oh, you also mentioned 'ramp start'. So, make sure you're doing the startup properly, in particular that you're waiting for full alignment of your EGI (waiting for INS NAV READY to blink before switching to NAV mode) and enabling EGI mode for navigation (on the front center panel). JDAMs are highly dependent on your aircraft having a good fix on its own location, and won't work properly/at all if your position info is substandard.

А мне бы хотелось что б онлайне помимо потерь самолетов игрока показывалось чило потерянных пилотов- н-р 5/3 и т.д.

:cry: Fighterstick за 3600, на еврики гдето не больше 90, а я тут заказал за 115. Совсем охренели. Тут его еще ни в одном магазине не найдеш, одни черенки лопатные какие то продают. Кинулся по интернет магазинам, вилы. Нашел у amazon'a с импортом из америки, бля. 115 за Fighterstick 119 за PRO Throttle, ща сижу и думаю, еще бы чуть чуть, и можно было бы сразу Warthog брать. Короче посмотрю что за чудо, если что отправлю нахрен все обратно и куплю Warthog от Trustmaster'a

Nice mod.

Not sure about flares but definitely happens with mavs. I'd ordered my wingman to take something out with mavs and my MWS went mad at exactly the same time as he called missile away

Finally a detailed update about how this project is progressing, thank you for the heads up BarbsMan. Is the Super 530D the only added air to air missile ? what about MICA and MAGIC 2 as in FC1 version... Could you please also specify which cockpit for which aircraft ? I hope this mod gets clearance for public MP servers like in FC1 days where MICA EM was the AMRAAM/R-77 counterpart, same for MICA IR going against R-27ET or even Magic2 for R-73/AIM-9...This would close the gap between French and International MP communities. Tres bon travail, bravo a toute l'equipe de developpement !

But it's not modeled in DCS.

Me thinks it's gone a bit off topic here... anyway me also thinks, cheep purchase of a fantastic sim + more new buyers + more peeps to purchase Nevada map = more cash for ED to create more great stuff :thumbup:. Oh and just a thought, this deal ends today... do I see "Nevada"on the horizon:music_whistling:

@Sobek yes i understand, but we coming from object where we can see any details like house with every external and internal details where the complexity its extreme to the "object" in DCS with building look (and be) like a simple box with low resolution texture... And anyways 10km = 30000 Feet, cruise altitude of flight, at this altitude we DON'T see object and low relief in simulation AND in real. ED can make like Flight simulator, make disappear 3D object since where we don't see it (less than 10km) for trade with single photorealistic texture of the ground can be possible cause at low and middle altitude over 10km except high building we can't see the difference against 2D and 3D object, and the power saved by the same terrain than Arma 2 with divided complexity and loose a lot of detail like interior of house or extreme details and texture can be using for the simple 2D photorealistic map. I prefer have a bad transition effect but with nice graphic before and after that than actual, and if its well done with same position and color against 2D and 3D object/texture we will almost not see the difference and we can obtain better graphic... Actually the size effect make simulator have a false dimension and with correct size effect, where big object close of us not look little but realistic, with a good exploitation of that we can show at realistic way 10Km object and anyways try to give big view range are fail cause we don't see far like real life, well its useless to eat power and kill performance for make at final unrealistic thing... Its only an idea, don't kill me xD Anyways i have a good reason to think that soon computer will have a BIG revolution with extremely more powerful and faster hardware with CPU at THZ frequency, and when we will have it, the problem will be solved... @LostOblivion Yeah i agree but more important than change graphic engine or new 3D model or any eye candy, i have said it a lot of time : I think the most important thing that ED must have to make soon as possible its a SDK. Cause a lot of things that a lof of people ask will never be done for a lot of reason like ED don't want to loose time for several things or simply want but don't have the time or think its eye candy and not useful and more. With SDK every idea can be exploited make a better simulator with more possibility cause the "fan made" are often best than original and sometime we see extraordinary things. That can too solve a lot of problem, like people who will rewrite AI script cause actually DCS AI are EXTREMELY BAD and that not only eye candy or other that really important and we can obtain advanced air maneuver from AI, we can be able to adding better effect for explosion and adding (thing that we ask since LOOONG time) vapor effect on wings, ground crew and more... And most important thing, community already have contact with ED team (like exactly right now we talk with Sobek) for simple "game" that rare and ED can ask to the community to make a lot of things for them, we can have sometime really nice thing cause fan made are nice and ED can have more time for important things like correction of bug and problems, optimization and more and everything of that can help to adding more playable aircraft and ED can take several mods/addons and aircraft and make official things and give to ED really big and better commercial argument without need to give money for work and the time loosing for SDK will be really faster take back and at final give to ED more time.

и останутся только те у кого широко закрыты глаза;)

I would play simulators even if they were still without textures - just pure shaded vector graphic in it. DCS environment is more I could ever expect.

Here are the switches... also i´ve bought 25 mini switches from ebay (10€). the rotary switch in the xps file is wrong. I got another one... something like this:http://www.conrad.biz/ce/de/product/709280/MINIATUR-STUFENSCHALTER-3-X-4 also this: http://www.conrad.biz/ce/de/product/445518/POTENTIOMETER-PC16-MONO-4K7-LIN/SHOP_AREA_19152&promotionareaSearchDetail=005 and this: http://www.conrad.biz/ce/de/product/741173/BUCHSENLEISTE-2-X-10-VERGOL-RM-254 conrad.zip

(я с работы писал), а сейчас пришел. ;) загляни в личку ;)

Topol-M, I trust you have a lot of knowledge about CAS. But I don't hesitate to recommend the faboulous book "Joint Force Harrier". Just read it and you learn a lot about how the non-RADAR equipped Harrier does their job in Afghanistan. And you will learn, the author (Harrier pilot) never complains about not having a GMR and yes, there is bad weather in Afghanistan as well. That's what CAS is like today and - although I lack the crystal ball - I don't believe any A-10 will ever be put into a mission where it is has to fight against a large group of armor. These Cold War scenarios are long gone (perhaps that'll change when Uncle Sam will find some "100% sure" proofs for weapons of mass destruction in a state somewhere next to Iraq, just as they did there....:cry: but that's another story)

Представляю вашему вниманию ролик посвященный А-10, выполненный командой =RAF=. Ролик делал =RAF=Brodyaga, в первый раз. Особо просьба не пинать.

Интересно, сколько раз к этому времени будет перепродано одно и то-же в разных "обертках".

Когда только начал летать еще в ГС, были такие отважные ребята, которые сидели на РП. Я тогда не мог понять как они это делают, и логическими умозаключениями додумался что это должно было делаться так: В миссии должен быть специальный ЛА, если на него сядешь то на F10 появляются свои и вражеские ЛА. Потом правда узнал, что делается все по другому, но мысля осталась, почему бы так не сделать? Решается вопрос что РП не может сам летать и не надо устанавливать доп. ПО.

Вот решил и я написать несколько строчек, а то за 8 лет наболело :): По самолетам доступным для управления: 1. Необходимо для баланса добавить следующие самолеты: F-16A/C, A/F-18A/C. их явно не хватает.:thumbup: 2. Су-25, Су-25Т можно пилотировать, почему Су-25ТМ нельзя? 3. Добавить пару самолетов для обучения основам пилотирования: например L-39, Су-25УТГ... Пусть будет как в жизни летающая парта :smartass:, а потом...:pilotfly:. По самолетам недоступным для управления: 1. Необходимо отредактировать вооружение самолетов одной марки, находящихся на вооружении разных стран например: F-16 состоит на вооружении множества стран, у каждой страны своя модификация: block10,15,25.... у каждой свой тип вооружения. 2. Для мододелов внести возможность управлять геометрией крыла. (для этого можно сделать МиГ-23млд летабельным - самолет неплохой... 3. Добавление различных вариантов окрасок самолетов сделать простым. 4. Возможность убирать пилоны (для пилотажников). По редакторам: 1. Ввести начальные ресурсы кампании, количества самолетов, танков, ракет, а то не интересно.... 2. Возможность видеть на карте какую территорию контролирует группировка, по ходу действия кампании. 3. Границы России и Грузии есть, а где Абхазия и Южная Осетия? Наличие поможет при планировании миссии. 4. Шаблоны сложных систем ЗРК выполнить разработчиками игры. С Уважением....

= В нынешней реализации. Надеюсь, понятно? :) Честное слово, не знаю даже что и сказать :) - все от тебя зависит, от твоих способностей (зы я к стати тоже умираю даже очень часто). И от тех, кто против тебя будет. Заходи, посмотришь (и на тебя посмотрят). Есть такие, кто умирает очень даже не часто, 10:0 летает. Элита? Поглядим, когда сделают жесткую проверку :).

SEAD flights work fine. Search radars have issues, which is what the SEAD craft would be attacking if they were working. Try changing you AFAC aircraft to a 0h-58 heli and make it invisible. I've had good luck doing it that way.

флапероны

На Су-33 гораздо более развитая механизация крыла для увеличения подъемной силы на малых скоростях и максимального снижения посадочной скорости несмотря на большую по сравнению с Су-27 массу. Там вообще другое крыло, не только по механизации, но и по силовому набору. Оно ведь еще и складное.

Скачал уже довольно давно улучшенную модель су-27. А сегодня решил на су-33 полетать. Модель - базовая. И вот что заметил. Не знаю как на старой, а на новой модели су-27 элеронов нет, а их функции выполняют закрылки и рули высоты. Это косяк модели, или так в реале? И заметил, потому, что на су-33 элероны есть отдельно. Хотя, ща порылся по фоткам(в текстах нигде напрямую не нашел ответа на этот вопрос), и нашел парочку, где видно, что элеронов отдельно все-таки нет. Тогда такой вопрос - а почему так, и почему тогда на су-33 они есть?

Не твоего ума дело. Я тебе ничем не обязан.

А я и не юрист... кому надо я уже раскрыл свои знания, остальные в эти "надо" не попадают...