Jump to content

Avimimus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1455

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Avimimus

  1. Avimimus
    I'm now thinking about how micro-dynamic campaigns - where only a small part of the front (e.g. in the mountains) is active - and what fun it could be doing combined arms with helicopters. I wonder if it will be compatible with the save system? So you can pause it if you are running offline/solo?
  2. Avimimus
    It would be nice if people could get together to produce a generic FC3 like avionics package that other mods could use as a foundation.
  3. Avimimus
    I love this mod! A couple suggestions/requests: - The UPK-23-250 gunpods should be an option for the underwing hardpoints - MDB-2-67U bomb racks should allow carrying four FAB-100 bombs per hardpoint (for a total of 16) - Adding the two new types of S-5 rockets that were just released by ED would also be great - Also, the R-13M/M1, R-3S, and R-60 (older version, not R-60M) air-to-air missiles should be options. P.S. B-8 rocket pods are also appropriate for the underwing hardpoints (apparently)! Should at least be an option for the -98 I think?
  4. Avimimus
    I wonder if someone could add in the 30mm gunpod?
  5. Avimimus
    Currently, if I'm carrying cluster bombs - I can't find a way to select stations - so all of the wing bombs drop at once! Similarly, I can't seem to select individual rocket pods (or salvo) like I can in the Su-25.
  6. Avimimus
    The update mentions the Ka-52... but what I think is meant is 'Black Shark 2' or 'Ka-50 III'... not the Ka-52?
  7. Avimimus
    The inability to set fuse/release settings for the cluster bombs (RBK, KMGU) means that they can't be used for a lot of attack profiles. This puts them at a disadvantage compared to any western aircraft (including the A-10A) which has the ability to change settings for cluster bombs, and can thus use them in more situations (e.g. lower altitude releases).
  8. Avimimus
    They already updated the FC3 3d models for free! I'm getting FC2024 just to show support for the idea of more FC content (which could someday include 4th generation planes if we're very lucky), but I'd also get it just for compatibility reasons.
  9. Avimimus
    Well, technically the coder did. It looks like it might have been the coder doing it to ensure contract fulfilment by RB (rather than RB doing it to ED). While, speculation on this is a bit inappropriate, I think - it is good to at least remember that there is a three way (or four way) relationship between parties: Coders/Artists <-> Razbam team <-> Razbam ownership <-> Eagle Dynamics (Not including any investors or licensors - those would add additional complexity).
  10. Avimimus
    So... how about the CRV-7 next?
  11. Avimimus
    Only the left hand cannon seems to be working? P.S. Regarding the flight model - if there was a way to produce a more severe high AoA stall, it might prevent getting into the weird spin state.
  12. Avimimus
    After what happened with the Alphajet, it may be the case the ED has contractual clauses which allow them to take over a product which is no longer being supported. The tragedy, however, might be the unreleased modules - if Razbam has had their team members sign non-compete clauses and/or has the IP for existing work - then we might not see aircraft like the Mig-23 or IA-58 (even if they are relatively complete). Of course, this is very speculative.
  13. Avimimus
    I suspect that might be less of a concern in wartime.
  14. Avimimus
    Are there any fixes to the flight model planned? An issue with all of the previous flyable Su-17 mods has been that it gets stuck in a weird stall if the angle-of-attack increases too much! Some of the mods also had a lot of oscillations in pitch at certain speeds.
  15. Avimimus
    Maybe this would be a good time to approach ED? I did check this thread last week in hopes of seeing an update. It looks like a fun module.
  16. Avimimus
    AI controlled - but it was the newly released flyable version.
  17. Avimimus
    Quite excited about the new Flaming Cliffs update! Will fuses be added for the RBK series? Not being able to set fuses and other settings for RBK, KMGU etc. makes these weapons much less effective than their NATO counterparts (now that those are getting fuses, rotation rates etc.) This is important for Flaming Cliffs.
  18. Avimimus
    As a PZL design - and an older design - it should be quite possible to get all of the information required to model the Mi-2URP without national security concerns getting in the way. It is also the next most important Soviet helicopter by production numbers. Anyway, It is fun to have a mixture of experiences. It'd also be the first helicopter with a MCLOS missile - which would contrast nicely with the more advanced types of guidance (SACLOS, SAL, Laser beam-riding, and radar guided) that exist in the sim. I really enjoy MCLOS in the Viggen, and it would be very satisfying when it worked... more skill is involved after all! It also has an armament that is slightly heavier than the existing light helicopters, and a considerably larger rotor... and is just an amusing design overall!
  19. Avimimus
    I must say - the release of the Kiowa really increases my desire an additional angry tadpole! The Mil Mi-2 would make quite a contrast, both in technology and in flight dynamics! It'd also give a more scout like helicopter to the Warsaw Pact.
  20. Avimimus
    I just hit an OH-58D with 32 rounds from my Gazelle... and it was forced down (not on fire)... a BRDM in the same sortie took 12 rounds to burn. Edit: To clarify - that is 32 rounds from the GIAT 20mm (not the HMP).
  21. Avimimus
    Any word on if FC2024 will include fuzes for the the Soviet bombs or rockets? The RBK series in particular really needs it (and is being left behind with the updates to NATO bombs). The KMGU could also do with having settings configurable in the mission editor. P.S. Don't some Russian rockets have airburst modes as well?
  22. Avimimus
    The other question regarding contracts: If Razbam were to hypothetically shutter... what is the state of their licenses with their various dev teams? Would it be possible for any of the assets, coding or research to be transferred to a new developer? Could their personnel leave to form new teams? Or do they have non-compete agreements? Of course, we probably don't have access to that information any more than we know the contractual relationship with ED - but it might prove critical if some of the developers want to continue (or recover some revenue from existing work) and the company leaders don't. Personally, I think we shouldn't be speculating too much. But I did feel like mentioning this additional angle, as it might be significant.
  23. Avimimus
    The modules I was looking forward to the most were the IA-58 and the Mig-23... without those, and with no licenses for the Su-17 or Iskra apparent - there might not be that much for me to pick up. I'll probably pick up the OH-58, F-18 on sale someday (F-8/A-7/A-1 too if they ever get released). Probably the only one I'll get day one is the Kfir and FC2024. So, a lot of my future purchases were being developed by teams under RAZBAM.
  24. Avimimus
    I disagree with this. I own the disks to a lot of older games and I have dosbox I don't see why we should accept not being able to purchase and maintain our own software. With DRM and expecting constant updates we've come to accept software as a service, rather than as something we can control, manage, and sustain ourselves. Maybe unsupported modules should be opensourced for offline use?
  25. Avimimus
    Ah, my mistake - X5 was likely destroyed by a secondary! But an example of 16" guns used against destroyers can be seen in Operation Hailstone (for example). Secondaries were also used for shore bombardment often (that seems to be very well documented).
×
×
  • Create New...