Jester_159th

Well then enter the "competition" and get your money back and a all expenses paid trip to Moscow to boot.

This is going to get downright nasty. .....Now. Where did I put that screwdriver.........

I had a similar thing happen. Turned out to be the way I had my flaps mapped to the slider on the throttle. Especially the slider (but rotories as well depending on what and how you've mapped them to various commands) make sure you leave a small "dead zone" at either end of it's travel. If you don't you'll get spurious key commands being constantly active (which can cause the SF window to pop up).

I know what you mean about an entire new rig being expensive, but IMHO upgrading anything on that rig would be a waste of money in the long run. Chances are you won't be able to upgrade the CPU without replacing the mobo. And even if you could the speed of the FSB on the mobo you've got will drag performance back to a crawl. Putting a new GFX card in there might buy a slight improvement in some games, but with the CPU load in LOMAC you'll still not get anything like full value out of it. Even replacing the RAM would be a waste since the chances are the RAM compatible with that mobo would be a bottleneck in a new rig. If I were you I'd start saving money and bite the bullet for the moment. Use the time to start shopping around for the best component prices you can find.

.....You could have mentioned us as well.......Jeez! I though we were friends??????? :p Just kidding. Although there are a few other squads around (such as ourselves) with an Su-25T wing, the 504th are probably the best in the business. You can't go wrong joining a squad like that. If there's anything they don't know about the Su-25 and 25T it's not worth knowing.

Manny: I was referring to good pilots full stop. Whichever their personal favorite sim is. In my experience a good pilot will remain a good pilot no matter what sim they fly (after they've had time to learn the basic key commands of course). They seem to have this built in ability to naturally accomodate the different flight charateristics of different planes and different sims and adapt their tactics to match without having to think about it too much. I wouldn't mind being able to do that myself someday!

No challenge there at all. Having flown both quite a bit I'm confident that the good pilots will be good in either sim. Given the time to learn the basic key commands that is. TBH I really don't understand these elitists that swear one is better than the other. Both F4 and LOMAC have good things to offer the virtual pilot. I personally am happy to enjoy both. (EDIT: Not referring to Yellonet here....More to the guy he quoted from the other forum and anyone else where the cap fits!!)

.....The F-16's afterburner?? :P

LOL. Not exactly what I had in mind, but you got the idea!!

If you take Mizzy's idea another step or two though, you could have avery interesting situation. Suppose you start with a base terrain graphics engine (not necessarilly LOMAC's current one) and then add plane sets to it as payware add ons. You then have the basic sim with it's original plane set, but the add ons could then draw in enthusiasts of other periods of air combat history. For example a Pacific/Asia terrain could handle WW2 (US/ Japanese etc prop planes and ships), Korea (MiG-15's/ Sabres etc and could integrate late WW2 models P-51D's flew in Korea for example) and modern day scenarios. European Terrain could realistically handle plane sets from WW1 through the cold war period to the present day. Same for Middle Eastern/ African terrain. In the end you'd have a single simulation you could taylor to suit your own tastes, and depending on how uniform the coding could be it could set up some very interesting MP possibilities as well. I'll be the first to admit though, I'm not a computer programmer and there could well be practical limitations to this type of idea. There would also be some major problems to overcome. Designing a campaign engine that would be scaleable enough to handle the different time periods is one that comes to mind.

Someone definately did. See if you can find the Flaming Cliffs promo trailers. In one of them you will indeed see an Su-25T being landed on the Kuz. Never tried it myself though. I'm just not that good!!

Sorry, bearing in mind the context of the snipped quote (and the post it was in reply to), that's totally untrue. As you said you have to *look* around to spot things even with labels on, that's quite true. But you ignore the fact that labels (in their default setting) are either bright blue or bright red. They stand out from their surroundings. I've never seen a fighter camo scheme designed to do that in modern times. In this respect labels ARE totally unrealistic. They are however a useful training tool and are a trade off against the lack resolution. They are also a useful tool to allow customers to scale a flight sim to suit their personal tastes and needs. That to me is the important point. It opens up the product to a wider audience. Afterall we do this for fun and relaxation don't we? So if someone's paid their money for the product and they want to use labels, they should not be made to feel in anyway "inferior" to those that decide not to use them. It's not "better." It's not "worse." It's just different. There's no right or wrong on this one. As to why there's no servers allowing labels, well it's simply that's the way the host (and in most cases the members of his/ her squad) want it. Simple as that really.

It depends on how well modelled the aircaft are and how well modelled their environment is. I think every one of us has a particular favorite aircraft we'd like to see modelled. But to be quite honest I wouldn't buy a sim that had (for example in my case) a Harrier or a Jaguar in it if the plane was modelled badly and the envoronment (both graphically and campaign and/or multiplayer wise) was poor. I'd prefer to fly a well modelled aircraft in a believeable environment. Even if the aircraft modelled wasn't on my personal favorites list.

Great photos, Mike. Thanks for sharing. What type of camera did you use? Picture quality's fantastic.

Firstly then you're talking from a position of ignorance. If you haven't bought it how can you know about it? Or are you basing your opinion on the scuttlebutt and hysteria that there's been on these (and other) forums? I suppose you believe everything they print in -so called- newspapaers like the Enquirer or the Daily Star as well. Secondly, if you're not going to buy it, then why are you still here? If you think they're going to change things to suit you then you're going to be disappointed. As someone else said: Deal with it. I've had the download version from the day of release. No problems installing or running it whatsoever. The majority of users are fortunately in the same position I am. If you want to deny it to yourself that's your problem. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Don't use the one on Saitek's site. It rubbish. I looked at a couple (but as you say they're thin on the ground), unfortunately I can't remember where I got them from for the life of me, and I haven't got them anymore. Eventually I sat down and set up one that suited my needs (and a couple of changes I've made to the default key asignments) and learnt the profile editor at the same time. Took a while and a bit of frustration, but it was worth it in the end.

I have found you need to let the front wheel fall onto the runway by itself as the plane begins to slow. If you try and force it down by pushing the stick forward it'll blow the front tyre everytime.

Stopping? Let me guess...Drogue chute collapsed? If so remember to shut your throttle down completely before releaseing the chute. And congrats on mastering landing so fast. They had to sweep my first few attempts up!! (Apparently the runway's still a bit bumpy where they had to resurface it....or at least that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it!!)

It does take some getting used to. I had similar problems when I started out with it. I found that the twist rudder on my X-52 was too sensitive around the mid point. Setting a small dead zone in the options panel in LOMAC sorted that out for me. Sounds like you might be having a similar problem. (And don't expect anything. Approach it like a whole new sim. If you think the take offs are hard wait till you try and land the beauty for the first time!!)

Don't fire two ER's, followed by an ET. Rather fire a single ER followed by an ET around 5 -10 seconds later. Reson being if you lose lock, you've only wasted one missile not two (assuming you don't reaquire lock straight away). Depending on range to target, the ET should continue to track with it being an IR seeker. Also remember that the max range distance is calculated on a non manouvering target. There's a second mark further down the range scale. That shows the limit of the missiles no escape zone (ie where it should be able to hit a target that's maouvering quickly). The closer you are to that mark, the more chance you have of a kill. As far as evasion goes I've had success with both F-Pole and barrelroll manouvers. But it takes timing to get the timing right.

I doubt you'd be able to use Jeppessen, since LOMAC doesn't support multiple windows, you'd need to alt-tab out each time you wanted to look at the charts.

I think it would be better the way it seems to be already planned (thanks for the hint GG!!) Bear in mind that if Russian planes with updated electronics suites etc are added, then something has to be added to the NATO side to keep some sort of even playing field. So in actual fact, to add those planes and keep the balance in the sim, you'd actually need to add 3 or possibly 4 aircraft. That, IMHO is far too much work to expect ED to put into and add on.

Make sure by running one of the quickstart missions with no profile selected. As soon as you get in hit F2 and then F1 (or any other command that takes your fancy that can be changed with the Alt key). If it works fine then you know the problem lies with your profile. If it doesn't, do the same again but this time completely disconnect the X-52. If the keyboard's not faulty it has to be either the profile or the X-52 itself (unless you've altered the default key assignments in LOMAC itself).

IIRC: If I Remember Correctly. Off hand I can't remember about guns mode. It's definately covered in the relevent training mission though.....Maybe I better go back and look at it myself as well.

IIRC it suggests lasing the target to get a more accurate range measurement.