chaos

Hi Joey45, Something like what's in the picture below (SU-25 trailing edge tabs). Are you saying to forego the few extra polys and build geometry with actual 'body'? A single poly would be easier and less taxing on the poly-count and would create basically the same effect. Vortex generators would be a good example to use a single poly, wouldn't you say so? Aerials etc....

In an effort to optimize the model I'm working on, I'm faced (no pun intended) with the need to use 2 sided polygons. I've included an example below of what I'm trying to achieve. The closed geometry has edges 'extruded' outward. Notice the vertex inside the circle is attached to all 5 neighboring faces. This is not possible unless I'm using 'Mesh-Modeling' (from what little I know). As soon as I convert to Editable Polygon, the geometry breaks... My question; what type of modeling do the experts here use? Do they mix-n-match Mesh and Polygonal modeling and how does that work? If there's any Mesh-Modeled geometry in the model, things will start breaking as soon as one uses modifiers and have to convert back to an editable poly. I prefer polygonal modeling but for this specific problem it does not appear to be a viable solution. Obviously I'm missing something fundamental but I can't figure it out (despite reading several books on 3DS (2011)). Any help would be highly appreciated...

To me the Viggen is a lot more exciting than many of the other aircraft 'in development'. It has a unique bag-of-tricks and is certainly _not_ just another strike aircraft as someone suggested. It was once considered to be the replacement for Dutch F-5s and F-104s. It came quite close to actually beating the F-16 back in the late 70's. In the end the F-16 won but it shows how capable that beautiful aircraft really is. Viggen all the way, baby!

The bit that stood out for me was climbing out over Vegas in the F-15. It was like watching real-life footage from the 'Discovery Channel'. Many thanks for doing this live stream. Hopefully there's a lot more to come.

Going out on a limb since I don't have Tech Preview installed... but what you're saying seems highly unlikely. The updates might be installed without any interference of the user but I'm pretty sure you can save your docs before the installation actually occurs.

The days of the Mac being the 'preferred' platform for audio and video editing are long gone. If you want to buy a Mac for the looks then by all means, go take out a loan and pay through the nose for a hunk of brushed aluminium...

They did release it, actually. It's free as well... as long as you're a bonafide developer...

Hi Panthir! I was there (Apeldoorn). Adamski's ladder was epic! You'll find a few of us 'Flanker-originals' still popping in and out of the forums... sometimes under new callsigns. I believe Adamski moved to New Zealand and is mostly into civvie-sims these days. Jeroen (the event organiser) also frequents the forum every now and then...

HTC Vive VR developer edition available Just wanted to ask if ED had any plans to support, or is looking into, the Vive VR headset from HTC/Valve. Valve will be selecting developers to receive the HTC Vive development kit for free. Could somebody from ED and/or Fighter Collection comment on this?

Sinn UX for looks but I actually prefer to wear my Fortis Cosmonauts Chrono. The Sinn is a divers watch and filled with oil to withstand extreme pressure. Don't worry about Zulu time. Easy to convert while you're looking at the watch. You won't miss it at all. Just get a simple watch. All the bells and whistles are distracting... and Breitling, Rolex etc. are a definate no-go ;-)

Again, not impossible... If the 'cool heads' prevail and decide to implement this rule anyway then we _will_ do it... obviously. Not for the _right_ reasons, mind you, but because that's how the public would like to see it done. I have a fundamental problem with that and so should you. Darkwolf said it a lot better then I can... Don't know what to say to that... those events don't need immediate action... as in- "right now or we'll crash" sort of thing while the other pilot takes a leak and needs 30 seconds to open the door. We can go 'round and 'round and come up with any situation which may arise while the other pilot is 'outside'. It is missing the point of this discussion. Again, you're missing the point... or I just suck at explaining. Either way... it is NOT an "inconvenience thing" as I've tried to explain before. ============================================================ FAA Regulations PART 91============= BTW: regarding occupancy of the flightdeck... §91.105 Flight crewmembers at stations. (a) During takeoff and landing, and while en route, each required flight crewmember shall— (1) Be at the crewmember station unless the absence is necessary to perform duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft or in connection with physiological needs; and (2) Keep the safety belt fastened while at the crewmember station. (b) Each required flight crewmember of a U.S.-registered civil aircraft shall, during takeoff and landing, keep his or her shoulder harness fastened while at his or her assigned duty station. This paragraph does not apply if— (1) The seat at the crewmember's station is not equipped with a shoulder harness; or (2) The crewmember would be unable to perform required duties with the shoulder harness fastened. ==============================PART 125======================================== §125.311 Flight crewmembers at controls. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each required flight crewmember on flight deck duty must remain at the assigned duty station with seat belt fastened while the airplane is taking off or landing and while it is en route. (b) A required flight crewmember may leave the assigned duty station— (1) If the crewmember's absence is necessary for the performance of duties in connection with the operation of the airplane; (2) If the crewmember's absence is in connection with physiological needs; or (3) If the crewmember is taking a rest period and relief is provided— (i) In the case of the assigned pilot in command, by a pilot qualified to act as pilot in command. (ii) In the case of the assigned second in command, by a pilot qualified to act as second in command of that airplane during en route operations. However, the relief pilot need not meet the recent experience requirements of §125.285. ============================================================================== Don't get your information from a TV station or News website... ;-)

You may not get the whole 'inconvenience' thing (which it isn't but whatever...) but let's just hope that real experts drive this thing instead of politicians, media and laymen...

I like his comment on the AOA indicator :)

First off... there is no requirement to have two persons in the cockpit at all times... even when you find yourself flying over Manhattan at 35000ft. But, what do I know... I fly long haul... to the U.S. among many other places. I'm not that familiar with US air-law but I know of several U.S. airlines that operate under the 2 person at all times 'rule'. From what I know, this rule was established right after 9-11. Whether this is 'law', I don't know. It could very well be a company SOP. Again, don't quote me on this. Point being, this is definitely not a requirement put on foreign airlines. One life lost is one too many... obviously. Where do we draw the line because we might as well stop flying altogether, right? What about a bus-driver? Should he have somebody watch over his shoulder at all times because he just might fall asleep behind the wheel? Where do you draw the line? This is an over-reaction by the public. Understandable perhaps but let the real experts learn the lessons and --possibly- implement 'solutions'. From where I'm sitting... I still trust my colleagues just as much as before this tragedy. That's all I have to say about this. For another pilot's point of view... http://mashable.com/2015/03/30/pilot-response-germanwings/

Agreed and I see what you're saying now. Still ridiculous to go to these extremes to prevent a similar occurrence from happening again. I can see all sorts of problems cropping up when it requires 2 people to open the door... especially since the door has to be opened frequently, for all sorts of reasons, during any flight. And I'm getting sick of so-called 'experts' and media pundits driving these changes while the investigation isn't even completed yet. Knee-jerk reactions are never going to work...

Bravo... at least one person here who gets it. It is a fact of life that some things just can't be prevented.

2 persons in the cockpit is NOT mandatory... it's a recommendation. Besides... it is a bad idea. What if the other person is incapacitated? Now you created another problem by trying to solve the first one. Great!

Doing something useful to keep 150 people alive isn't ridiculous There... fixed it for you. From my point of view this is all window dressing and will not accomplish anything besides creating hassle for the crew. I hasten to add that this new 'rule' created by the relevant authorities is a recommendation.

It really isn't an 'outbreak' and the lock has been in place since 2001. It really isn't difficult to crash a plane when you're in command... even with all the jumpseats taken. Now we hear a Dutch politician wondering if the doorlock is still relevant. I don't know whether to laugh or cry...

I think you're wrong so lets agree to disagree... To significantly affect the way things are done onboard an airplane because of some idiot doing this sort of thing once in a 'billion flights' is not sensible...

Of course they'll manage. That's not the issue. "Does this make sense?" is the question one should ask...

Having 2 persons in the cockpit (the '2nd' one has to be a cabin crew member obviously) is inconvenient at best... totally impracticable at worst. There have been many times where someone 'has to go' and the colleagues in the back are busy serving your meal or otherwise busy with their duties. Oh well, you guys will have to eat your steak cold then, no problem. Having 2 persons in the cockpit at all times is another ridiculous rule to keep the flying public happy. Never mind the fact that _nothing_ was accomplished safety wise... just another inconvenience to the man or woman working onboard...

Nowhere have I read that the captain used the keypad to alert the other crewmember or to enter the unlock code. Did he forget? Just one of the many simple questions that need to be answered before we put the blame on someone... but no... this is a public lynching by a rabid crowd wanting 'answers'. I don't care if the answer is seemingly obvious. The investigation needs to be done carefully and methodically and thats impossible to do within a day or 2. It is a disgrace how this tragedy is/was handled by _all_ parties.... media, prosecutor, politicians and even a US air-force general (what the heck was _that_ all about?). Everything is in the public domain including voice recordings and medical histories of persons involved... 2(!!) days after the fact. A sad state of affairs...

Going out on a limb here but... I don't think that Valve's HMD has a high enough res. for DCS:World either. It's been a while since Oculus demo'ed their latest and greatest. I'm sure they'll continuously iterate on their prototype. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have something in the pipeline that is significantly better than Crystal Cove (or whatever it's called). They do _seem_ to be focused more on the mobile side of things these days. Also, they're are trying to come up with a way to interact within VR. Something that Valve already has a solution for... We'll see. It's good that there's competition because that will spur development of bigger and better things. I just hope it doesn't turn into a platform war. I don't want to be stuck in the "Steam-world" (prefer my DCS to be stand-alone) for sure...

Never mind the fact that you're going to spend the better part of the day 'updating' your OS with all the patches that MS released over the years...