LawnDart

Watch the Virtual Thunderbird LIVE performance @ VFAT 2007! As most of you know, VFAT is a LIVE show. This video was created entirely from this event. with each pilot controlling his own jet, from his own home, using LOCKON: Modern Air Combat and HOTAS Cougar joysticks while being streamed over the internet for a live audience of more than a thousand people on November 16-17, 2007. Download movie! Download Quality: WMV HD 1280 x 720 Length: 56 minutes File size: 956MB You can also watch the video streamed via Stage6! Streaming Quality: DivX 720 x 400 Length: 56 minutes File size: 584MB Note: I began working on this movie following VFAT weekend back in November and had roughly 90% of it done within two weeks. My intentions were to release this "just as it happened"-type video immediately after VFAT for those who didn't get to see our demo live in person, and also to show it the way we'd want to. Unfortunately work, Christmas and life came in-between and it took me another month before I found enough time to finish the remaining 10% of the video, but here it is. Enjoy! /LD

LOFC CD ver 1.1: Disc check weekly LOFC Web (download) ver 1.1: No CD check, since there is no CD. Both, regardless of which patch version 1.11, 1.12a, 1.12b etc. If you downloaded and activated Flaming Cliffs, you will never have a CD check. If you bought the Flaming Cliffs on disc, it will keep asking you...

Kuky, Your sig image just made me LMAO:megalol:... I just swatted at my computer screen and tried to blow the little bug clear for about 3-4 seconds before I realized.... DOOOH!!!:doh::lol:

Gunner has a thread dedicated to his pit in our forums @ Virtual Thunderbirds. If someone wants to talk directly to him you can do so by signing up at our boards and then... Click here to go directly to "Gunner's Pit" thread (it's currently 9 pages long and with plenty of photos showing the progression of his work - yes, he's still making it even better!). Here's a picture I took when I was out visiting him back in October.

Where is the option for the F-16? :cry:

Second that!!!

Hello everyone (again)!

Topic is a little misleading. Vista isn't synonymous with DX10...

I agree 100%! The US demos are all tactical demos of the jets. If you've ever seen the difference between the US Viper Demo team and the US Lockheed Martin demo (manufacturer's) it is night and day. The military tends to show its war capabilities and tactical application with a few aerobatic moves built in, where as the manufacturer (which in many cases resembles the Netherlands demo team) show off the capabilities of the airplane in efforts to display what the plane can do ("sell" the plane). The manufacturer demos rule IMHO! I saw the Belgian Air Force fly last year and their F-16 demo was under wing loading and high AoA almost the entire demo. Loved it! I saw this Raptor demo as posted on page 1, earlier this year. It is impressive, yet at the same somewhat boring in the sense already described. The airplane, if put to the test (manufacturer flying) could certainly do so much more. That's taking it a little far! Being proud of your culture, heritage or accomplishments of fellow people from your region of the world doesn't mean you automatically fear other people in any way. I'm a dual citizen (Swedish & American) and I'm proud of certain things from both parts of the world I have personal connections to. It doesn't make me any more fearful of other countries on the planet, just that I have no feeling of personal connection to their acheivements or citizens. Lastly, I do believe the F-22 is a far more advanced fighter and capable of so much more than they show in the "tactical" demo, hence I still like the SU demos better. The Russians still have a knack for beautiful displays of their fighters more so than the US military if you ask me. Although I'd still go see ANY air show ANY day! :thumbup:

Thanks for the list Frazer!!! Good work. :)

I tell ya, people today don't have any kind of courtesy or smarts... If he wanted to make a version of his own, at the very least he should have approached the creator and asked! It's a fine form of flattery, but in reality it's really only plagarism... Blacklist the guy! :bash:

@Kato, this might be early or the wrong place to ask, but by what date do you need everyone's .max file in order to put together the VFAT07 mod and test it?

WOW! 8 different teams of 6+ pilots already signed up to participate, all with ~40+ minute shows (not including takeoffs, landings of course). Counting off the top of my head, that should come out to roughly 7 hours of just formation flying teams SO FAR each day if every team were to fly all days... Granted I'm sure there will be different teams, different days depending on each teams availability during the day/weekend... but WOW! :shocking: :thumbsup: Definitely looking forward to some solo trials or other acts competing for remaining time slots now that the weekend is already jam-packed... :joystick:

There are no stupid questions. The only dumb question is the one never asked! You cannot sum up the reason and equations for lift by simply one principle. Wing designs vary greatly and factor in various ways to create an optimal design for its purpose, speed, type etc. The plane I currently fly IRL has a supercritical airfoil and it's quite easy to see that no one single principle can explain its complex lift equation. In terms of combat flying, placing ones lift vector on the bandit generally means to put the enemy along a line from your nose and straight up above your canopy! It's the direction that's straight up from your seat (the direction where your wings will create lift when you pull back on the stick). You can always roll your aircraft so this vector will point at the bandit when you pull on the stick and this is what you want to do in a furball to "pull" the bandit into your sight and deploy your weapons. It also creates immediate aspect & angle off problems for the bandit if you're engaged defensive. Hope this helps! Good thread...

Fudd, u guys still need our dedicated box on the 15th for Red Flag? I'm sure you've been talking to Striker about it... We have it blocked off for you guys that weekend. Btw, if you need some tips about how to set it up for good performance (high fps, low latency, view etc), let me know. Ciao!

1. Name (+website): Virtual Thunderbirds 2. Number of aircraft & type: 6 F-16C Fighting Falcons 3. Estimated airtime: ~40 Minutes (wheels up to wheels down) 4. Mods/skin required: Virtual Thunderbirds Mod - Replaces the F-15C 5. Contact person + email: lawndart@virtualthunderbirds.com 6. Country & Timezone (+/-GMT): USA GMT -6 to -9 Note: We will not be able to participate in the rehearsal weekend due to the 2007 air show schedule; however, we're planning on using our own dedicated server and should any other team wish to fly on a US based server, we can have it setup for you both weekends. P.S. For the purpose of putting fear into those not yet signed up for VFAT?! :doh::megalol:

. RIP

Nice job GA!!!

Q. What goes up and never comes down? Happy B-day you ol' fart! :yay::clown_2::prop: A. Your age!

There are several factors in this accident and any equipment on the airplane that was INOP at the time, merely added to the chain of events leading to the accident. I find it very hard to believe any known and deferred equipment or lack of fully operational systems were the cause. It might have factored in, but only much later in the chain of events leading up to the accident... Most equipment on a plane can be MEL'd, meaning continued ops are permitted for a set period of time depending on the type of item being MEL'd. Sometimes depending on the type of equipment being MEL'd, there are performance penalties and a revised ops procedure (either by the pilots, maint personnel or both) to continue safe operation of the airplane without the affected equipment. In the case of TR's, they can certainly be MEL'd and continued ops are permitted without any operational change on behalf of the crew. The performance data for takeoffs and landings should reflect the factored distances, but other than that - there's really no change in procedure for the pilots. Only reason an item like that has to be fixed within 10 days (or as per the MEL), is so that the airline can't postpone deferred items indefinitely. Chances are that when you take your next commercial flight the airplane you get on may have some equipment MEL'd and deferred. Sometimes it can be a benign item such as a coffee maker, other times an engine TR, FMS, APU, pressurization auto controller etc... depending on the type, they have various lengths of time they can remain INOP before maintenance has to fix the item - but never will the airplane continue in service unless it's safe and the MEL procedures can be complied with by the crew and maintenance. In the case of MEL'd engine TR's, it is safe to have only one operational and the factored landing distance should be revised on the release. The crew would have been aware of this and most certainly had their updated data, so anything you hear about a thrust reverser being INOP and causing this accident is purely coincidental and only made things worse in a chain of events that had already progressed too far for this accident to take place. There were many factors leading up to this accident, but the most crucial will likely turn out to be pilot error with other factors adding to the grim results...

.

Good luck with that!

There's something to be said for having one standard... even if it's not always exactly what you want.

I think Microprose intended to use Falcon in "digital battlefield" when it took the helm from Spectrum HoloByte (later Hasbro Interactive) in the nineties... Btw, I can't believe it's soon a decade since Falcon 4.0 came out ('98...

:thumbsup: ...how bout that! Didn't even know that was an option... this makes the 50Kb argument seem even more silly.