Leaderboard

:) Ну у нас есть проблема - когда надо сделать дуэль Су-25 vs A-10, желательно чтобы они имели равные по возможностям ракеты. А в игре таких нет - Р-60М слабее АИМ-9М, но мощнее АИМ-9P, так что получается, что какие ракеты не ставь, либо Су-25 в минусе будет, либо А-10. Надо бы равные по возможностям ракеты в игру ввести. Ну на фоне того, что у соседей в качестве оружия был введён пистолет(!), добавить в ЛО пару слабых ракеток ВВ, которые вообще-то были штатным оружием у самолётов поколения 3, представляется вполне целесообразным. Да и АИМ-9P была введена в ЛО2 именно для ближнего боя по типу 60-70-х, когда тепловые ракеты наводились только в ЗПС, сделать для неё советский аналог в виде старых версий Р-60 было бы вполне целесообразным (можно было бы использовать эти ракеты в боях МиГ-29 vs F-15, Су-25 vs A-10 на серверах, специализирующихся на ближнем бое). Короче, вы не правы:P. Перспектив развития симулятора не проглядываете :) Даёшь ракет побольше и поразнообразней на все виды боя!:)

no comments...

See my post #2282, made in March earlier this year... http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1149717&highlight=Legends#post1149717 ;)

http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/features/63444/Voodoo-Extreme-2011-Reader-Choice-Award-Voting Mine craft is a simulation? Seriously?

Дмитрий, подскажите пожалуйста, а где можно найти книгу Э. Петросян "Особенности аэродинамики вертолета соосной схемы"? Понятно, что она есть у Вас на работе, наверное в качестве одной из множества настольных книг, в КБ "Камова", в библиотеках. А меня интересует инет. Искал никак не могу найти.:) И хотел узнать Ваше мнение о книги Загордан А.М. "Элементарная теория вертолета". Нет ли там ошибок, недочетов? Я так думаю, что довольно полезно почитать при изучении вертолета, хоть там и рассматривается одновинтовая схема вертолета. Загордан А.М. Элементарная теория вертолета. 1955.rar

I changed the script line to slmod.chat_cmd('-Axeman hold',1,1, 'blue') and it works. Don't know if it came from the extra space after "chat_cmd" or from the "-1", I'm no guru ^^

First of all, thank you for taking the time to update this mission Grimes :thumbup: I have been keeping a keen eye on this thread. I have tested this mission out earlier today and I also had the problem with "Show of Force 1" area JTAC Badger not available on VHF FM 30. The trigger area worked correctly, but I believe the 2 Humvees did not move to their WP1 position and therefore meant they were not "switched on" as JTAC. I also noticed that the Badger JTAC were in an "off road" position in the mission editor whereas all the other JTAC's are placed "on road". I can't be100% sure that these factors are the reason why you cannot contact Badger JTAC, but they are just things that I happened to notice and I hope it helps towards resolving the issue. Thanks again Grimes!

-- Даёшь ракет побольше и поразнообразней на все виды боя! -- А вот за это "+" тебе!!!

hosting on dedi server with servman and slmod installed Had a problem with 'suspicious person' ..though no error message initially i did a low flyby over the city...never got jtac appearing on F4 or F10 menu (i was tuned to 33FM) to confirm the target. I could see two humvees sitting out of town, presumably the jtac...and scanned around for 1/2hr or so but didnt see anyone suspicious. we also had the Shorad mission tasked at the same time (it was actually tasked before the suspicious person task) and a few people hunting for those elements. just before i returned to vaziani...had a big error come up in chat window saying something along the lines of: "this trigger created by lowest bidder Message #2 Failed to clear flag 23"

Will be there a 2.3 version with new country's squadron patches and emblems?Happy holidays!

HI GRIMES , i've played the mission on a pubblic server but something doesn't work immediately with tgt 1 (suspicious person) as my scrrenshot confirm so jtac was not available and find the person was impossible. Can you confirm?

Beh, è conforme alle specifiche ED: un solo pilota e, se prendi una curva troppo forte, vola! :D

I looked before and hehe I laughed - this status text is known for me very well :lol: Whoever thinks LO planes add unbalance to DCS have the solution just by no adding them. It cannot be easier, can it? It just can't :D

I've uploaded v6 to the ED file site. You can get it there or hosted from my dropbox. On Station 6 (co-op) Changelog for Version 6 -Added additional task type for destroying armed buildings. Player must contact JTAC to get location of buildings. -replaced legacy ChatIO scripts with slmod -Fixed assorted sound issues and changed file format to decrease file size (reduced by about 0.7mb) -adjusted TOR mission spawning -Added 8 additional A-10C client aircraft (Tusk flight now flies out of Batumi and new "Boar Flight" out of Vaziani -Added replacement KC-135 just in case of a mid-air mishap -Fixed known bugs causing tasks to not spawn or be completed Versions released Windy Winter: A partly cloudy windy and cold winter mourning Spring Dawn: Early mourning with fog and a heavy cloud base in areas Summers Night: A mostly clear night Fall Clouds: A dreary cloudy day in the fall The 3Sqn Dedicated Server will be hosting all 4 versions of the mission. Hopefully the mission will stay functional through additional patches. As stated in a previous post, No Ka-50s were added to this mission. They just don't fit with the long flight distances. However one of the reasons I added the 8x A-10C was so they could be easily changed to Ka-50s if someone wanted to. There are a few farps scattered throughout the map, which the enemy don't really go near, so it is feasible to add Ka-50s in. I think its time to finish one of those other missions I've been toying with... :music_whistling:

Results from ceiling test in DCS and RL comparison Report: So, here it is. I have conducted a flight ceiling test using the procedure provided by BlueRidgeDX. I'm assuming this is a correct procedure for reaching the defining ceilings and the validity of the results depend upon it. Furthermore , please forgive the long post, but I wanted to do this with some level of seriousness. (sorry for completely hijacking your thread EventHorizon) Settings: In the mission editor, I have set up a standard day using "normal weather". This includes; 0 wind and turbulence; no clouds or fog; no precipitation; 15 deg Celsius @ SL; QNH=760 @ SL (given in mmHg and corresponds to 29.92 inHg which was set on the altimeter in the cockpit). On the load out-page, I set 100% fuel, no ordinance, 0 % ammo, 0 chaff and flare. This load out gave the total weight of 36 054 lbs and drag index = 0 (which includes pave penny pod and all the regular stuff attached to the hog). Before embarking on the test-flight, I prepared a speed chart to aid in keeping the proper speed at the different altitudes. This chart is presented in figure 1 below. Execution: I started from minvody and headed south. At FL 5000ft I went full throttle and started a climb while trying to stay at the recommended speed dictated by figure 1. In the beginning this proved to be somewhat difficult to execute with satisfactory accuracy, but when my climb rate started to come down, it got gradually easier. When nearing the first ceiling (combat ceiling @ 500 FPM) I was able to maintain the proper speed plus minus 1 KIAS which was satisfactory. Furthermore, given the inaccuracy in reading off the climb rate gauge, it wasn't a specific second where I "hit" the ceiling, there was always some variation in climb rate, as I was trying to adjust for speed. Therefore I made two measurements per ceiling, one on the first instance when all variables met the requirement for the given ceiling, and one where I was barely able to maintain the parameters. In the results I refer to these two measurements as "lowest measured altitude" and "highest measured altitude". Using the mean of these two numbers, i calculated an approximate error for each ceiling. These errors are probably not statistically correct, but serves to give some image of the accuracy. The biggest error of any of the ceilings should in reality be considered as the true uncertainty for every ceiling. Documentation: I possess a screen-shot of every measurement (both the low and high for every ceiling) showing KIAS and FL on the HUD, the climb rate gauge, the left MFD showing CDU-POS page with IAS, the fuel quantity gauge (needed to determine the weight of the aircraft) and also the barometric altimeter (although not as accurate as the readout on the HUD). I was also going to save the track but I always forget, and this time was no exception. :doh: My plan was to include the screen-shots and track, but instead I decided to hold them back until/if someones wishes to see them to avoid unnecessarily cluttering this thread with multiple screen-shots in case no one really cares. Results: The results are presented in figure 2 below. As you can see, it begins with the low and high value for each ceiling, followed by the mean value with suggested error. This value is considered to be the actual result. Next I have made an approximate read-off of the remaining fuel for each ceiling. I was then able to calculate the total weight when I was back in the mission editor. I then proceeded to find the values predicted by the TO 1A-10A-1 for each corresponding ceiling. The charts from which I extracted this information is found in the performance data supplements (TO 1A-10A-1-1) part 3 entitled "climb". If someone wants to check the numbers in the TO and don't know how to read the charts, or want to check that I did so correctly, then this is how I did it:I began by selecting the proper gross weight, (as calculated by remaining fuel), along the bottom horizontal axis. Then I followed a line upwards until I hit the drag index = 0 curve. Then I went straight left to read of the predicted ceiling as no weather correction was needed. I included and error of plus minus 500 ft considering the inaccuracy reading the chart, and the inaccuracy in reading off remaining fuel. The TO does not include a chart for calculating absolute ceiling, marked in figure 2 with "no data". Last, I intended to present the difference value between the values measured in DCS and the values obtained from the charts, however there where no considerable difference for any ceiling if you consider the error boundaries of the given values. This leads naturally to the conclusion. Conclusion: The DCS environment and FM accurately depicts the hight and climb performance of the A-10C as it is in RL, IF you postulate that the A and C model have equal performance profiles. (Paulrkii or someone else in the "know" might confirm or dis-confirm (is that a word?) this postulate (I thought that the A-10 got an engine upgrade somewhere between A and C?)). This result surprised me. As I said earlier, I had always felt aircrafts in ED products to be "underpowered". It only goes to show how useless "feeling", "thinking" and "believing" is when dealing with such a sophisticated simulation (the force failed me), and how only a serious endeavor into the simulation can reveal it's accuracy. To sum up, there are two postulates that these results rest upon, namely that; the speed profile of the climb supplied by BlueRidgeDx is an accurate means of testing an aircraft's ceilings, AND; that the A and C model have equal performance profiles. End notes: Again, sorry for the long post. Wonder if anyone will bother reading the whole report? :D But it doesn't matter, as it was extremely satisfactory and great fun doing this anyway. :thumbup: Attachments: Figure 1: Figure 1.pdf Figure 2: Figure 2.pdf - Inseckt:smartass: Edit: I have noted an error in figure 2 under "results" and "combat ceiling". Here it reads 32 250 (plusminus 250) ft, but it should in fact read 32 650 (plusminus 250) ft.

Crunch I agree that you are probably right about the systems part. I was refering more to the possibility of them updating all the aircraft to the advanced flight model that the Su25T uses. I stand by what I said though. How can someone pass judgement on software they have not even seen yet? Thats like people who say X game is going to be great. Then it comes out and is rushed and poorly designed (Duke Nukem comes to mind). I say we wait and see.

There is no easy way to merge players flying FC and DCS planes in the same enviroment. In FC I'm able to fly making barrelrolls, talking with someone holding mobile phone, watching TV, fire missiles in the same time (and who knows what else). In DCS Im crashing after doing such things. Will FC3 change anything? Definitely not.

... а я и не знал, что любовь может быть жестокой:D (с)

Несмотря на то, что автор могёт, Ил всё равно такой Ил. Камеры ровно такие же, как ДЕСЯТЬ лет назад, и они у него никогда не отличались кинематографическими возможностями. В итоге скучновато.

ЕД переняли эту добрую традицию.

"I am an American and do not speak you language. I need food, shelter and assistance. I am somehow involved in bombing you, spying on you, or helping others hurt you, but now that I am alone and helpless, I will not harm you, I bear no malice towards your people. If you will help me, you will be rewarded in the amount of one Dollar; I hear that is lots of money for you people, but I will try to trick you into accepting Canadian." :D

Стоит он денег, но вроде как не мифических. Для многих проектов это не большие деньги. А для бесплатных проектов он вообще бесплатен. Для исследований ED Team его может вообще взять бесплатно хоть сейчас. Вот тут это все написано: http://www.havok.com/sales Моделирование поведения самолета думаю возможно. Вообще движок подразумевает моделирование практически любых объектов в пространстве, с учетом их свойств. Что-то должно допиливаться с помощью SDK, а что-то будет практически готово сразу. Понятное дело что над самолетами прийдется работать и не мало. А такая хрень как наземка, обломки взрывов и другие объекты, возможно для них уже все сделано.

Навеянно полетами на выходных, надо что-то сделать с меддогом и пусками в ТВС 120... для ЭТ меддог зарезали, а 120 кой хоть за горизонт фигач, неправильно ИМХО... когда сомнительные по эффективности в реале режимы применения являются самыми эффективными в игре...

А про планшетную карту Пушкин должен напоминать ? :)

Please please ensure you are downloading the correct versions - see here... http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1356403&postcount=3 Nate