Tracker

According to the following unclassified document Fuel Flow in the F15 at just under Mach .9 (.88) the WF lb/hr is just under 3300. This is not including WFAB and the test is at 45,000'. Considering the conservative figures, a fuel flow gauge that pegs at 100 lb/hr simply won't work for the Pratt & Whitney F100 class engines. http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/DTRS/1993/PDF/H-1920.pdf Hope this helps answer your question;) :cool:

Perhaps Guy Sheilds will have some info as to the true limits of the AMRAAM. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/micro_stories.pl?ACCT=742575&TICK=RTNB&STORY=/www/story/01-27-2005/0002908506&EDATE=Jan+27,+2005

Two things you might check (assuming you have set your pilot as default already) 1. Is your pilot dead. 2. Have you reinstalled lomac to a different HDD or folder but left the original in tact? If so, the registry may have trouble associating your pilot with the original logbook. :cool:

Buy in Russian, read in Russian Keep in mind the russian version will most likely have all the keymappings (which have changed somewhat in 1.1) in russian not to mention the encyclopeodia, FBP and mission editor. Is ok if you read russian :icon_wink

Hey, since we're brain storming here...A clean up crew that actually removes the debris so we don't have to quit and rejoin!

Would have to see it in action actually. I have experienced these results at all altitudes and likewise have successfully locked the enemy at 12,000+ meters. I doubt there is a vapor refraction in the model so that wouldn't explain it. So either the aspect is sufficient to degrade the returned signal, doppler stops shifting or counter measures begin working. Or its just a bug. I know the radar doesn't really work properly in the F15 when first turned on until you reach ~5000 feet or about 2500 meters for the russian jets. So, altitude does play some part in the model. So many pilots have successfully locked the enemy from altitudes above 8500 meters that I thought I would offer alternative explanations. ;) Hmmm, does it do this in single player as welll....? :cool:

Never More You've got me panting about people ranting and my eyes are slanting unamused. With all the holler, and the bother, I get some water to cool my fuse. I sit and think, while on the brink and start to drink while everyone stews. Then there in the cup, it sits right up, like a little pup, sayin' "I'm soakin' fused" So I slap my knee, because I'm free, as I finally see, there on the floor Words from a Poe It, tho most will not know it, I guess I will show it....:tongue: Never More.

Real Life or Game, once the needles pegged.... Ever peg your speedometer? LOL

In the US I usually get clearance after reporting position abeam tower in pattern on downwind. That often results in tower returning with #3 for landing as a full pattern will have one on short final, one on base and me on downwind. A couple times I have had to make a short approach or extended downwind because of different speed planes and the fact that this airport has a modified straight in for final as well as right hand pattern for normal approaches. Add to that some traffic may fly left hand pattern (with tower authorization) and we could all end up merging at final at the same time! Weirdest approaches are with the choppers as they always seem to screw up the towers timing ;-). You have probably noticed that LOMAC provides for a relatively long final for such nimble aircraft so your clearance for visual at that range isn't that bad. Addtionally, I have had the tower cancel my clearance just before touchdown when traffic has taxiied out or a previous pilot crashed on the runway. "Orbit for Traffic" :cool:

Check your instruments pilots. There are several that can be maxed out while the Jet exeeds the guages limits. Fuel Flow Vertical Velocity Accelerometer (G-Meter) Speed Indicators Have I missed any? :cool:

FPS Drops: When the server waits for vector info from poor networks it begins stalling the game because it becomes consumed with trying to resolve the poor network packet losses. So soon, everyone will suffer. Very important to make sure ALL CLIENTS are connected at same setting. Best tested setting is 128/128 For clients and 10Mb Lan for Host. I have personnally flown for greater than 5 hours in servers with these settings. I have seen missions (an I have hosted missions as well) that have run for more than 12 hours stable. Frame stalling: (intermittent hiccups in graphic updates at precise intervals) This can be caused by a variety of things, but basically, your processor cant keep up. High graphics and clouds for instance will make the screen updates 'click' instead of being smooth. One thing I have noticed. Not exactly sure of the reason (but I believe it is some windows "Online Cache Routine" running updates in the background) is your internet temporary files. When they get big, FPS will drop in LOMAC. Delete the Temporary Files and see if your trouble lessens. Other than that, we need better net code.

I've experienced this as well, the FPM is well below the nose of the A/C. Interestingly however (as opposed to most aircraft) adding flaps will lower the nose in the F15C. Try landing full flaps and see if it improves the final:rolleyes: :cool:

Unfortunately, no indicators. But, there are some things you can quickly do on the fly to determine if AP is set. 1. Switch to NAV Mode 2. Change Waypoint using the ~ key. As you cycle through the WP's your plane will change course to intercept the new course if AP is active. Toggle the A key to toggle AP on or off as desired. If deactivating, use CTRL-T to reset trim.

I suck at gunz. Packman chewed my six for like, what was it Packman 8 rounds? lol GS2 - Raven, Just a quick word - I helped Ice in the conception stages of this ladder and it has always been intended to be more than just Guns down the road. But for simplicity and to get it rolling Guns only is a good place to start. Its not exactly my cup of tea, but I still enjoy a match now and again. There is a lot of potential here and competition is good for the community.

Nope, canopy can remain closed ;-) Just make sure your on hard surface off RWY at base and shut down engines for about 3 minutes.:cool:

It appears obvious to me that votes have been based on the belief that adding the KA-50 will somehow will somehow affect the delivery time of 1.2. The effort and time needed were not factors in the poll. If they were, there would have been an option that indicated it. The question here is, does the inclusion or exclusion of the KA-50 affect your decision on purchasing the 1.2 patch? My answer: No. I'll pay for the upgrade either way. If adding it opens up new markets then put it in. If adding it helps keep current users, then put it in. Otherwise, just leave it out for now.

you may have answered the question with your own comments. "in the time it takes me to descend to 8500m I get that much closer" As you climb in altitude you 1.) Increase incident angle 2.)Increase distance from target. This combo could be sufficient to lose lock. "no more than 1000m above the bandit at a range of 60km" 60km is outside ECM burn through range. You may be seeing coincident effect where your opponet turns on jamming a short time after you have locked them. In multiplayer there is a definate delay from the time a lock is removed and the time the warning reciever stops the "locked" alert. This may also be true in reverse causing a 5 to 10 second delay in opponent ECM response to your locking them. Additionally, the selected weapon may play a part in this. Try the Su-33 with 27EM and see if the problem goes away. If it does, then distance is the issue. If it is still there, check that you are not exceeding any AOA limits. Also, make sure that your Equipment hasn't changed modes from Radar to EOS automatically. It will do this if it loses lock and you will especially have the EOS dots if the enemy is retreating in AB, but now its out of parameter* so you cannot get a lock. And lastly, has the enemy began dropping chaff and evasive manuevres? If so, it will be very difficult to reaquire a lock until you have closed the distance considerably (60km down to about 40km) as you will keep locking chaff instead, and then it will disapear and you'll keep losing lock. *in this situation the enemy is leading you and the closure rate has been reduced or nullified requiring you to close the gap before a lock can be established. :cool:

In 1.02 The frozen rain seems to be related to players renaming the High, Med and Low scenery files. In 1.02 the invisible boom interestingly seems visible in external views which indicates to me it is related to the code that 'tears through' very close objects. I have participated in refueling the Su-33 with 3 of us on the same tanker simultaneously. Once in position, the basket does appear. The nuke is a render eater and seems to be related to the runaway averaging we see when a players network connection is lost and his altitude and speed steadily climb to infinity. Similarly, an explosion that should be small scale 'runs away' and becomes very large and troublsome for the processors to render. This may also have ties with memory leaks that step on variables used for scaling. :cool:

I have tracked this FF bug a little. Situation 1: PlayerA joins game in progress and chooses aircraft slot x on either coalition, plays a while and dies. Switches sides chooses slot y and gets shot by FF and leaves game. PlayerB joins (same mission) and takes slot y. All of the entries in the log for PlayerA now say PlayerB. PlayerB gets shot after takeoff by FF. Situation 2: Mission incorrectly setup to attack targets and accidently includes one or more slots from same team. Switching planes fixes the problem because the other plane has not been set as a target for the AAA or SAM. Situation 3: Player Joins Mission, Plays on Team x and leaves. (this can be for any time interval, perhaps even days if server is still up) The player returns and this time chooses Team y. The mission seems to 'Remember' his previous choice, and he is shot by FF.

Better nate then lever* I had a similiar quandry, price vs. performance. I finally settled (not too long ago) on the Sapphire 9600XT 256Mb. $125.00 US I believe the XT has more pipes than the Pro. Thing to consider...ATI cards seem to have an issue with the F10 view in multiplayer. My old GeForce would toggle between F10 and Cockpit flawlessly, but the ATI is dead ringer for trouble after about 10 toggles. 2 cents worth. :P *There is a joke that goes with that...

Hmmmm, lotsa talent out there. Perhaps we also need a different game version from ED for customer created planes the same way Microsoft FS2000 had Pro for making planes. We can call it "Beyond LOMAC" ;-)

The server has all the vector data available to it and can export it as needed. Basically the map is like 1.02 F10 view. ED may want to place export restrictions on maps that have F10 turned off, or at least use the mission options for F10 in the export code. (Just a thought)

If this is a signal meter it should be "Radar Signal Strength" or "Radar Signal Intensity" meter or indicator. And from my experience this is how it works in the game. Otherwise, if it truly uses dual baluns to vector the distance of the received signal it should be "Radar Distance" meter or indicator and each light would represent a distance measurement. http://www.l-3com.com/randtron/img/designerpol.pdf#search='Dual%20Balun%20Radar' :cool:

Part of the problem here is the energy loss in pitching from FL350 to 90degrees nose down attitude. Keeping in mind that your MA is reduced for a lighter A/C, the loss may be rather significant and difficult to regain due to some reduced thrust at higher Alt. Use a 1/4 Split S manuevre and keep your G loading below 2 and I think you'll find your accleration factors are closer to what your looking for. Another thing you may want to consider in this manuevre is your actual negative Vertical Velocity. Assuming there is no glide component and a true 90 degree nose down attitude your instruments should be syncronized well. Thus your Mach Gauge and Altimeter will agree. Your VV gauge will max at 6k. To Calculate your true accleration factor your going to have to clock either altitude drop or mach increase. I think you'll find its not as sluggish as it looks. As regards glide component of the F15, I think it glides very nicely pitched for ~200 to 220 knots. Best glide seems to kick in below 13,000' and actual attitude varies depending on loads. In a real A/C there will be a difference between Idle approach and actual flameout due to autorotation of the turbines but I havn't seen this in the model. In this sim I've glided a fuel empty F15 54nm from FL200 and a crosswind component of 15knts with plenty of energy to complete a 90 degree left turn into the wind and land at 160+. ;-) Another brief comment also on thrust-to-weight ratios. The F16 has a 1.1:1 ratio where a 747 has 0.26:1. I don't have the F15 data in front of me, but this also plays a part in the acceleration factor. Additionally, keep in mind that the physics behind thrust will occur even in a vacuum ( otherwise our space missions would all be one way, lol) but the reduction of thrust is actually do to a pressure loss in the combustion chambers where less oxygen is available.:cool:

Unforeseen is Unforeseen Ecclesiastes 9:11 sums it up nicely. Regardless of the reasons for the delays we must remember that anything of value is worth waiting for. Proverbs 21:5 comes to mind as well. ED has been on this project diligently and I for one admire the restraint to rush ahead. One quote I have heard applies as well, "Fools rush in". From what I see ED is far from fools and appropriately does not "rush in" the way other software producers have before them. Patience young ones, "Good things come to those who wait" :cool: