ARM505

Do a free flight in the T with half fuel and no weapons, just to get the feel for the aircraft in it's natural state, it's quite a bit better - everybody (myself included) tends to start off with the plane loaded like a truck. Remember this when the **** hits the fan, because if you're in a tight spot you'll need to ditch your stores unfortunately. Also remember that you'll need to ditch the Vikhr racks if you want to go above about 680 or km/h otherwise you get the vibro-massage therapy! I know it can go faster, but I hate that vibration. Observe the AoA meter, it's handy. Don't expect it to handle like the A10, which quite frankly feels more like a radio-controlled plane to me, able to turn like an eel. Use the an autopilot function to help you concentrate on targetting when the situation calls for it. For example, in the T quick flight mission, put the nose on the horizon, throttle back, wings level, and engage attitude hold. Then you can get those Vikhr's off easily enough - you should be able to kill five of the vehicle column in one pass (a bit of an artificial situation, sure, but's its demonstrating a 'maximum' potential) In combat in an unknown situation, I consider it a good pass if I can kill two targets with them. The autopilot is handy in other places too, for example on the cruise in, so get to know it. You can then think about the attack, and get your settings sorted if using free fall bombs, cannon pods, munitions dispensers etc. Also, don't expect Vikhr's to hit anything at close range, or if you slew the designated point around too much - they will be too busy spiralling all over the sky. I usually use two per target (all the time on tanks), less if there are plenty of targets to kill, or if I'm at long range and I know the missile will have a chance to stabilise before impact. As has been said, remember to straighten the joystick curves for the 25, and 25T. Thats how they were designed to feel. I still think it's the best feeling flight model in all of the virtual skies, bar none. Remember things like the IR jammer when the time comes to get shot at (obvious, but I always forget to turn it on, doh!) For me the T, and the basic 25 are the most fun to fly in Lock On. Mostly because of the fantastic feel, but also for the challenge of manhandling the truck-like T around with a full load! Thirdly, the MiG29, for a few minutes at least, before I run out of fuel anyway!

Hmmm. So far I can't see Vista being anything but an awesome, slide show inducing system hog. Claims of fantastic performance, awe-inspiring graphics etc will have to stand the test of time. And unloading UI's etc, or whatever it does, takes time no doubt - 2 Gb is already a necessity for XP, will Vista need about 10 or so? Or do I get to stare at my HDD's blinking light even more?

Surely that airbrake causes quite a vigorous nose up pitching moment?

I'm not sure how this is going to work - let's say you're an ardent LOMAC fan, like most of us, and you have FC installed over 1.1. Now, you add 1.2, and get the Ka-50 and all the bits and pieces that go with it. How is it going to start up? Are we going to have to insert *both* CD's in series so SF can do it's thing? And if not, what's to prevent people installing 1.0, then 1.1 with a copied/borrowed CD, then installing 1.2 and just running it from that CD? And if that is the case, why not drop the whole SF thing entirely? We're already sold on this whole LOMAC thing, they'll definately be getting *my* money! Please note - this is NOT an anti SF post, I'm just curious about the mechanics of it. Just thought I'd be clear, especially after that GTR2 post (thanks for that info) got deleted, and the second one locked.

This is fantastic. You've managed to capture that easy to use, quick to look around feel from F22 ADF, with a comprehensive list of events, easily clickable etc. Just brilliant, well done! This is a must have....

I remember getting into the cockpit (read: greenhouse) of the DHC 6 Twin Otter I was supposed to fly the first day I got to the Sahara. The OAT read 55 deg C, 131 deg F. Lucky for me it was in the shade. Later I discovered I was about 70 km from the hottest permanently inhabited place on the planet, or so I was told at least. Whether that was true or not, it was still pretty warm!

I would imagine alcohol was involved at some stage in the mascot selection process....I just can't see it happening any other way :)

How can they experiment with DX10 graphics, when there are no DX10 gfx cards yet? Or do they run developmental stuff from Nvidia/ATI?

You know the saying "Evil prevails when good men do nothing?" It should have been "Evil prevails." I thought that saying from the movie was quite accurate. I've flown throughout Africa, including the countries from that movie, and I believe it. At least I didn't have any aircraft of mine get dismantled like that though!

I think he's referring to the system that says 'Missile, 6 O'clock, Low', ie it detects a launch (NOT by using the TWS/RWR system apparently). The voices can be found in one of the sound folders. Or am I wrong? I take it it's not a realistic system, but more an SA aid, like labels. Something like that. I've never seen or heard it in game.

A better, more flexible skin system in general would actually be nice. I'm thinking IL2's 'drop skin in plane folder' ultra simple system, which is quick and simple.

Touchbuddy experience.....hmmmmmm......(cue 'Brokeback Mountain' music). Couldn't you have called it something else?!! :) Fantastic stuff though, regardless of the name! ;)

CRC error - that means it's having a problem reading from that .cab file....maybe try cleaning the CD, or try a different CD drive? Otherwise you may need a new CD I would imagine.

Hilarious! I'll bet the RL military will be jumping all over this 'experten tactic' when they hear of it!

I should have added that they could definately use some of those things to improve the AI planning, you're 100% right.

I'd also like to say thanks to these guys for making this freeware - a real gem. If you look at the MS flightsim world, one of the reasons I don't play that anymore is because almost everything of any use is now payware. So it's a pleasure indeed to see something so genuinely functional and well executed released for nothing - kudo's to you guys, and the guys like you who've released such apps.

In the last F22 thread, I posted (then removed the post) that we need a forum rule that states: The F22 pwns all. That way, when somebody wants to argue otherwise, or about how a Typhoon or Su-XX or something else might give it a fair fight, we can say 'Uh-uh buddy, read the FAQ/rules, ok?!' This would purely be in the interests of saving time and effort, regardless of what the actuall F22 can or can't do. I now know I shouldn't have removed the post the last time I wrote this, so here it is again!

There's no way ED will program even half of what SB has in terms of mission planning and AI behaviour into BS for ground units. After all, ground warfare is SB's speciality. The Hinds were added merely as a bit of an afterthought, and are the only airbourne units. There are no AAA units or SAMs. Hinds have to be brought down by HMG, coax, or main gun fire. Alternatively you can die, hope they go away, or don't see you. The gfx are definately suited to your eye being on ground level. It's the colours and haze that really makes things seem real. SB has a brilliant mission editor, you can create some epic battles, and the AI is actually pretty good.

Funnily enough, I've shown some BS screenshots in the SB forums, as have others! SB is not an eye candy sim. Everything there is made to be functional. That said, the terrain is great because everything blends so smoothly - the colours and fading is great, the cammo is truly effective. It's a fantastic sim - worth every cent. Great support from the developers, who are constantly on the forums. Problems are actively discussed with and by the community, and the devs are really open about what they plan on doing. It's great.

'We're out of range!' yells Maverick - meanwhile, the A4 in front of him is basically peeling the paint from his radome with it's exhaust :) Good for a laugh...

He doesn't need a CD key, he's using the CD version. It sounds like the SF Dual Core problem. Unfortunately I don't know the answer, but look in the tech support forum maybe?

Much though people try and argue against it, IMHO I've never seen any series go to console and not be utterly hobbled, good gfx or not. The rule is, if it's on console, it's been 'dweebed'. I don't care if it looks like a movie. There is no example of progression in the other direction that I am aware of.

Quite frankly, I enjoyed my time on the B732 sim (full motion, all controls etc) while doing my conversion. I think they would have been a bit negative with me if I'd said 'Nice game!' I feel LO is an attempt at a sim, within the confines that a PC imposes, ie it attempts to simulate realistic flight/weapon/EW dynamics. Compare that to 'Ace Combat', which attempts none of that. So, for me, a PC sim can be called a 'sim', based on the developers intent, and how well they manage to implement reality. It can obviously be argued that LO has failed to implement reality to a close enough level. Nonetheless, despite not implementing a full start up sequence for example, it does attempt to realistically portray real world tactics. As many would argue however, it fails at that. It does have a good chance of succeeding however, with future iterations. Take Steel Beasts ProPE - that clearly falls within the scope of 'sim' to me, despite not completely modelling ALL functions of an MBT ballistic computer (again, for example). It does however allow the use of real world tactics, and real world gunnery techniques. The intent, and overall tactical use is there. You could hardly call it a 'game', I believe. To those that say that sims have to simulate every little function that the real deal has, as well as have ALL controls...well, I'll just say then there aren't any sims at all in that case...(as has been said)

Sorry, I deleted my post. Shooting from the hip again, might have been perceived as too sarcastic. But like I said, an F22 sim would seem to be a pretty dull thing!

I was actually a mechanical engineer before I became a pilot. Perhaps I am being too casual about it - as IguanaKing says, a succesful test is certainly fantastic to see for all involved, and is one more step on the road to successful deployment of the Raptor and it's associated weapons. But, my perhaps well hidden point is that dropping an unpowered bomb from an internal weapons bay, albeit at M1.5, is nothing particularly new (whatever the bomb might do after launch - all credit to the bomb in this case as well) - I would have imagined it's all relatively proven principles by now, a successful test would seem to back me up. Sure, it needs testing, sure, if I was a project engineer there I'd be very happy indeed, data being passed properly to the bomb etc etc. But by now, I would imagine it's more along the lines of a formality (as much as these things can get). Getting a complex system to function first time is indeed an achievement - but it's not like they just broke the sound barrier for the first time is it? I'm aware of the implications - it's a relatively cheap way to gain some stand off distance, while still maintaining the ability to strike precisely, and will no doubt save American pilots from a greater amount of risk - it's all good. But for me, this was kind of a 2+2=4 sort of thing, in terms of 'new things done.' I shouldn't have commented though, I apologise. I actually still find the SLBM thing ultra impressive though!