MonnieRock

Olgerd, I can only speak for myself but, I would gladly pay $60-$70 USD if 1.2 included full 6 DOF 3-d models for all flyables and AFM for all flyables. You could take my pruchase to the bank. :icon_wink Count on it. I would be willing to wait for this to develop for 1.2 myself as it would add a special touch to your simulation. Thinking for the future, you would then already have these cockpits and flight models behind you.

Evil-Scotsman, This is what I had time for. Back to work. 2005-11-18 23:55:18 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI No AA No AF Frames: 12146 - Time: 180657ms - Avg: 69.232 - Min: 21 - Max: 164 2005-11-20 16:37:02 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 2x AA Frames: 11930 - Time: 180775ms - Avg: 67.994 - Min: 21 - Max: 162 2005-11-20 16:48:42 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 4x AA Frames: 11618 - Time: 180770ms - Avg: 66.270 - Min: 18 - Max: 162 2005-11-20 16:54:28 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 8sx AA Frames: 5509 - Time: 180322ms - Avg: 32.551 - Min: 7 - Max: 133 2005-11-20 17:28:14 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 0xAA 16x AF Frames: 12093 - Time: 180863ms - Avg: 68.863 - Min: 21 - Max: 162 2005-11-20 17:39:12 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 2xAA 16x AF Frames: 12014 - Time: 180777ms - Avg: 67.458 - Min: 21 - Max: 164 2005-11-20 18:26:49 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 4xAA 16x AF Frames: 11327 - Time: 180623ms - Avg: 64.711 - Min: 17 - Max: 162 2005-11-20 18:38:57 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI 8sxAA 16x AF Frames: 4654 - Time: 179810ms - Avg: 27.883 - Min: 3 - Max: 130 This is why I choose 2048x1536x32 2xAA 16xAF My min is not affected and image quality is great

Evil Scotsman, I ran this test to show CPU benefits with different clock speeds. Using a Default setting to have a baseline Normally I use 2 x AA and 16 x AF when playing. Things I toggle depending on the mission are: Vis Distance High or Med (High has a huge impact) Water High or Very High I do not use Mirrors at all expect for the keyboard commands which I have mapped to my HOTAS. I usually have shadows on All Planar ( All shadows does not look that good to me) As far as running the GPU Load Meter you see that lock-on is not using both GPU's all the time as well as it could. Is it NV or Lock-on application? I do not know. Seems to use it a lot in extrenal views and when a lot of shaders are present( the water) You said you are using 8x AA. Is that SLI AA? I am on my laptop with mobile internet while working. When I get back home I will run some more tests for you if you like. 1) No AA No AF 2) 2AA 3) 4AA 4) 8sAA 5) 0 AA 16AF 6) 2AA 7) 4AA 8) 8sAA I got your PM partner but, my work schedule does not allow this for a couple of weeks before we can hook up. Sounds great though, I am looking forward to it. We will have a lot of fun and even more laughs :icon_jook

How many more CPU cycles will this cockip take to compute? We are at the edge now in 1.11 Will the Ka-50 be the only Flyable with 6FOF ?

Will this get attention in 1.2 or a 1.12 patch?

Farcry and Florida meets Lock-on and Russia

With you on this one :icon_wink

Here is a nice LCD I was looking at http://www.nec-lcd.com/english/whatsnew/press051013_e.html

I wonder too. How well does the hud display in 3d stereo?

For Lockon it is all about the cpu. The FX-57 is not enough for the sim.

Ordered mine for more than just lock-on. One reason is I can help one of my friend's with my current cards at a great price. That is what friends are for. Increased clocks and memory bandwidth migth not give you more frames on performance settings but, it will give you the same performance with increased levels of AA and AF. To be honest I only see more fps in overclocking my cpu. Lock-on wants more cpu, and it will be a slow road until they can either "tune up" the cpu usage or enable dual core support. CPU speeds are not moving up that fast per year. Example 2048 x 1536 x 32 No AA No AF Default "High" setting in graphics options stock cpu 2.4ghz 2005-11-16 17:00:03 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI Frames: 10697 - Time: 180785ms - Avg: 59.170 - Min: 21 - Max: 143 Overclock cpu 2.75ghz 2005-11-18 23:55:18 - LOCKON Su-27 Super Default High AFR SLI Frames: 12146 - Time: 180657ms - Avg: 69.232 - Min: 21 - Max: 164 Strange how the min stays the same And how missed frames are better Frames: 10697 vs Frames: 12146 with only a difference of 128ms between runs ha .128sec. My tests were close partner

Maybe we were a little off with communication because of the title of the thread. I do not think the SFM are incorrect I do not think the AFM is totally correct Do I wish all had AFM, Yes Do I think the AFM makes the sim unbalanced, no. It creates preferences. AFM for the current SFM flyables would not make them correct or incorrect, it would just enhance them with the added physics to the flight model. Initially in my post, I was basically trying to say how much I like the AFM and promote the effort and hard work ED has done, as well as the effect it has on me within the sim

well..all the technical data I do not know as I am a locksmith not a sim software programmer. I have flown civilian aircraft. I just like the feel of the AFM. If it is so wrong, then why is it there? As far as landing, I too landed the first time right on the money. That is not to say others had to tune their skills.

I have to agree, Once you start to dig deep into the AFM of the Su-25T the other aircraft feel..umm..too easy. Part of simulating an aircraft is not just blasting off into the sky and firing missles. What about coming home and landing. Man, does it feel good when you touch the gound like a feather with the SU-25T. Most of the players I fly with, some very good, have the most difficulty landing the Su-25T. Why? Because it is more indepth. You don't just do a loop around the runway and bam set it down. Some of the players that do a/a gunzo that are really good who fly with me, I challenged them to do gunzo in the SU-25T with me. They were shocked and told me how much fun they had with the flight model and the next thing out of their mouth was " Man, I wish the 27 had that or the F-15" I have to disagree with Kenan( nothing against you man) but this is exactly what I am talking about. "What do you want? To struggle while flying Fulcrum? I don't think of it as AFM, rather a LTFM (Looney Tunes Flight Model)." It is not a LTFM, nor is it a struggle, it is a flight model that requires more skill to master the areodynamics of an aircraft as well as training. Fighter or Bomber, or Helo. So I commend ED for the work they did on the AFM !!! It is what made me purchase 1.1. Not the plane, the AFM. On that note, I just fly the Su-33 to keep brushed up on my carrier landings, and the avionics. Other than that, each time I play with my friends I request them to have a Su-25T in our Multi misions or I get bored.

This a fact or a joke?

I just hope my system can render that cockpit without having to turn everything else down to low. In that video the frames look pretty darn slow. Chop Suey

Wow, Someone besides myself finally noticed it I agree totally. This has been there for all versions of Lock-on. Very distracting. Is it some sort of clipping? Does not look good at night either. Might seems little to some but a show stopper for me. We seem to be moving forward but why are some things overlooked.

One thing all sims could learn from that jane's series is the training...you felt like you were learning with the instructor there with you. Even though it was a "game" I learned a lot from this type of training. Especially if you want new pilots with little knowledge of this type of software. Actually..all of these are games ;)

I am with you on this 100% Then you could advance on other planes Afm for all aircraft and a different multirole for US side...F-18 would be great

Simple answer to the question is, No. Not with everything in the options menu maxed out. not playable. ie: mirror high detail,reflections,very high water,vis range high.........even with no AA and no AF. Brings my system to it's knees. Also you must have read my mind. Krasnodar has always been my testing ground because there are over 25,000 objects rendered.

Privet GaD Thought you good people would like to read the review on this video card in your native language. Trying to be friendly

Privet, Heads up for you. I do not speak much russian http://www.ixbt.com/video2/g70-7.shtml Spasibo, Monnie

So is the tung radar the latest software version like 2005 and the weapons against it like the 1980's?

Gentlemen, I admire the scholar approach to this. Maybe someone that is a weapons expert for the military can help us a little here without giving out too much data. Now, I do not see myself going out to the USAF bombing range and standing anywhere near 110 Ft from the point of impact of a Mk-84. Nor would I park my vehicle 110Ft from the point of impact and hope to drive away. Maybe some of your physics nuts can chime in this. What is the effect of this pressure/heat on a fuel cell in an aircraft say ummm 100Ft from the point of impact? In Lo/Fc it has always seemed strange to me the cluster bombs are far more leathal. Another thought. So you get a direct hit on a tank with a Mk-84. Want about all the frags from the target that has been blown to pieces? What happends to it's weapons stores? Or, you get a direct hit on an aircraft. What is the effect of it's fuel load? Thanks, Monnie

Hello / Privet Han, Will this be corrected in version 1.2? Spasibo Monnie