355th_Thomp

bump!! this is definately something you should not miss. If you like a challenge. And you dont like pre-scripted missions. Especially in a campaign where your hit targets dont stay hit in the next mission.. Then CAW is the perfect place. It has an sophisticated Intelligence application, it has a interactive battlemap, missions are flown with GCI and ATC... and a lot more! Experience CAW! You wont regret it!! -Thomp ps. (some advertising never hurt :D)

Brothers, I sent you an email with Kerch and Saki airport taxiway data as an attachment. Hope you can implement that into LOTATC! Thanks again!! -Thomp

Thanks Zillion!! Yes, that definately cleared things up! Now I know how to calculate them! :D -Thomp

FANTASTIC!! Thanks for the update!!! this may sound like a dumb question, but how do you convert from the regular lat lon to the UTM? There's 12 different datum systems, and im not too familiar with this, so how do you get your decimal positional information? -thomp

Ideally this would be the BEST option. A mouseover is a compromise, but not as realistic. If we provide you with the lat long of the taxiways etc, can you implement them into the app? -Thomp

just to clear up any confusion. The 355th are not the creators of CAW. Currently there are about 10 squads signed up. The admins consist of members from four different squads. And, yeah, the babe's can be found on the blue side :D -Thomp

If you are asking yourself "What is CAW?" Click HERE -Thomp

A few "bugs" or should i say things that seem not that good. 1. When two aircraft are flying really close to each other (in formation), the info which is displayed of the aircraft are overlapped. Its extremely hard to read what the info is when its overlapped. Any chance that info could be "dragged" away from the aircraft, or that when the info button (in the controls) is not "active", and you press the aircraft, it would only show that aircrafts information? Other improvements would be that there would be two different levels of info, one which would only show the callsign and second which shows the rest of the information. 2. It would be really great to have a airport diagram when you are zoomed into the airport. So, if I zoom into the airport (less than 5nm) I should be able to see the different taxiways and runways etc. It would also be nice to see the aircraft on the ground (like a ground radar) so that aircraft can be controlled and directed on the ground. These have been just some notes and observations experienced while practicing using this program for CAW (Campaign AirWars). Thanks again for a great program! -Thomp

ai mitä?

Im not sure if this has been made possible or not. But any chance there could be a feature where you can import background images into the LOTATC? For instance, if one radar is setup as airport ground radar (for taxing and airport ground operations) it would be cool if there was a background that could be loaded up with the exact airport schematics. This could also be used for creating air corridors etc. (i know you can draw these yourself in lotatc and then save em but drawing an airport schematics in LOTATC for instance is a bit impossible). Wonderful app!! the feature that you can assign callsigns is fantastic! that allows attaching aircraft types aswell! Great job with the app!! -Thomp

Check it out Militaryphotos.com site

Nice find!! But probably not a lot of info on avionics.. -Thomp

Is that FAC or AFAC? cool news though! -Thomp

awesome pics!!! -Thomp

Hey nice pic's of the 355TFS based in Alaska! -Thomp

That predator looks absolutely fantastic!! Will it be incorporated into 1.2 and if it will, any chance of receiving imagery data from it? :D -Thomp

bumpedy bump

very nice! thanks! your last link doesnt work for me though! -Thomp

you are correct sir, i never said you could fire them.. or use them in RL :D -Thomp

Well, according to these charts. You CAN carry three mav's on a TER. If they actually do, or dont in real life is another matter. But these charts AFAIK do show the proper loadouts. -Thomp http://koti.mbnet.fi/fly4fun/loadouts/A10-1.jpg http://koti.mbnet.fi/fly4fun/loadouts/A10-2.jpg http://koti.mbnet.fi/fly4fun/loadouts/A10-3.jpg http://koti.mbnet.fi/fly4fun/loadouts/A10-4.jpg

Well, if that was true, then the K models should be racked in three's either, right? And what about the Mav's on pylons 4 and 7, arent they a bit close too? Just food for though. -Thomp

See this thread http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=7354&highlight=Error+Code

posted in another thread with the same problems reported. Apparently this fix does help. -Thomp

Work has already been done on the F/A-18, it would complement the MiG-29K and it overlaps some of the systems found on the F-15. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see it would be a perfect choice!! To balance out the sim, I definately feel that the NATO side needs a carrier based aircraft. The GR-7 would be nice, very nice indeed. Its number two on my wish list, but the F/A-18 is on the top. Just for the simple reason that even though there have been similar sim's before, none have been able to reproduce it as well as I'm sure ED would. F/A-18's have been poor in aerodynamics, in flight physics and in realism. A carrier based aircraft is what is missing, and the logical choice would be the F/A-18C. ED has the technical expertise and the muscle to do it and it has done work on it already, all we need is for that to be completed! -Thomp ps. sorry, im biased! :D

I agree... hope they are continuing work on it! LOCKON2 is gonna kick some major butt! -Thomp