Fjordmonkey

It is very much a hardcore sim. Expect to read a LOT of manuals.

Nah, the insignia is a good representation of us silly Norwegians. We always do things in the most ass-backwards way possible :D

EEEEP!!!! /tinfoilhat

F5's my life! (sadly, never got to work on them, as they were phased out of the RNoAF by the time I did my time there :P)

Meh, I have a fresh bucket of patience that I will now commence to lather myself in. ....ooookay, weird mental images. brb, getting bleach...

Never is, no. I had a laugh over that comment :D

What has been seen, cannot be unseen!

Once again I've got this weird mental pic in which a horde of DCS-pilots are shambling towards Wags' house, moaning "paaaaaaaaatch...." and clawing/scratching at the door to get it :P

True, but the F4 nearly outlived the F14 in operational use in the US, and did outlive the F14 overall since Turkey is still flying their Phantoms as far as I know, and will most likely serve longer than the last three.

Here in Norway there's a 200ft AGL hard deck. Combine that with the very fact that Norway isn't flat, you'll often have imagery that seems way lower than it actually is.

And many people are closer to our ancestors than others :smartass:

Yup, remember that incident. A very severe case of cake, on face etc.

Once again, would you like ED to release the patch and/or product prematurely? Yes or no.

Happened to a B52 a few years back, if I recall :P Heads rolled over it, too. Which is good :D

It doesn't matter if they didn't. People would still be impatient, and then crucify them for NOT promising anything. Again, it doesn't matter. Either way you look at it, they are damned in the eyes of those that don't have patience.

What would you prefer? That they hold back a patch that isn't up to par and take flak for that, or release a patch that might have disastrous consequences for the players and customers? Welcome to software development. It's ALWAYS a pick your poison-situation. The biggest issue here is that ED gave a release-date. Even if they wrote the word estimated in 2-mile high capital letters in Arial Black-fonts, people would still go ape if the estimate proved wrong. Which it did, and now we've got this mess of a thread.

Sorry, but having been in the flightsim-community for a long time, five months isn't long to wait if the patch is of good quality. I've got an ocean-sized swimmingpool filled with liquid patience. IL2: Cliffs of Dover taught me that VERY well...

Apart from the fact that it's better to use time to get things done properly than to rush a half-assed patch out? No, not really.

Meh, give me a map of Norway and Sweden, complete with all the fun bits of topology we have up here. Now that would be fun...

Eh, I view this as a controlled experiment, and nothing else. Consider that the instructor pilot onboard with him was handling all comms with the tower and stood ready to take the controls if he mucked up too badly, this is not much worse than any other first-time pilot flying a pattern with an instructor pilot next to him. If he had been solo I'd agree. As it stands, this whole experiment had minimal risk to it.

Either way, I don't think they got much in terms of accuracy out of the pods, due to the vibration of the thing and the lightness of the aircraft it was fitted to. I love the Vipers after having worked on them, but I can't help but think that accuracy goes out the window after the first round leaves the barrel.

I've got four kits currently in various stage of construction. Tamiya Douglas F4D-1 Skyray, 1/48 Hasegawa TA-4J Skyhawk, 1/48 Meng F102 Delta Dagger, 1/72 Academy Su-33MK, 1/48 Currently the Skyhawk is getting the most work, while I relearn both building-techniques and the art of airbrushing. Been 20 years since I did this last, heh, so I'm a tad out of practice.

Having worked on the RNoAF's F16's, the Typhoon-cockpit looks so clean and simple.... Damn nice, though.

In some cases, it's a good thing. Like for instance with sites that promotes and distributes childpornography. The main problem, as I've stated before, is that regulation of the 'Net on the scale that Hajduk seemingly wants is impossible, as there's both major cultural/political problems with it in terms of censorship in a democratic country/society, as well as damn near insurmountable technical issues in trying to do so.

Comparing the 'Net to what happens when you break the regulations in traffic is, quite frankly, utterly idiotic. As someone else mentioned, you don't end up in the hospital because you suddenly come across porn, bullying or violence on the 'Net. Or because your browser suddenly spits out an error-message. To be honest, Hajduk, you haven't got the slightest shred of an idea on just how big the 'Net is, how much information it contains, how it works and how mankind has come to depend on it for damn near everything. Just like the majority of the politicians around the world that say that it must be regulated. The countries that do try to regulate things are usually crystal-clear on the fact that you cannot stop those dedicated enough to circumvent the blocks, nor the ones that have the technical skills to work around the inhibitors. It happens in China despite the amount of work they've put into their Great Firewall of China, it happens here despite the child-porn filter they have in place for all ISP's operating in Norway. So once again, for the N'th time: You cannot stop the signal.