JACN

Hi all, Anybody here is using this card?. I´m considering to buy a new nvidia´s 7800 series card in order to replace my not so old (...and in deed very fast...) GeForce 6800 Ultra. I´d like to know if 512 Mb video RAM will be reflected in a fps huge gain over the 256 Mb card, specially thinking in the "near" future release of LO-1.2. I rejected the SLI idea cause LO seemed to have (AFAIK) no advantage of it and Pacific Fighters runs in my FX-55 like a bullet (Water=3) even with my actual video card. In summary, I´d like to know if it´s really worth spending +200€ on a 512 card thinking only in Lock-on sim. I´d like to remark the fact that my TFT monitor doesn´t support any higher than 1280x1024 res... I´d highly appreciate any suggestion. Thanks, Á.

Hope so :icon_wink

It didn´t work, just only a pop-colors pixelated over greenish screen... :icon_frow

My Windows Media Player can´t run it :icon_frow ...Please, where can I find the codecs?

AWESOME skin!!! :D But..where did the Red Star or Rusian flag go? :icon_frow

...I´m sure these are the same kind of guy who LOVES seeing those scratches over their glass cockpit dome under different illumination conditions...also, what a "downright bizarre"!!! :tongue:

Hehe, LO1.2 no need to be a CFD solver, man, just a canned effect could do the job, something simmilar to FS2004, S&R, EECH..., give them a try or a look ;)

:D ...a clever guy who catched the concept... :icon_jook

hehehe, those mounted in your toy-helicopters? :tongue: Yes, Apache has a similar system. But, tell me, what makes a military helicopter maker to put a windscreen wiper there?. Reasons: a) It´s cool. b) Makes chopper look prettier. c) Relax pilot making him feeling like driving his own car in a wonderfull summer sunset. d) What the Hell, why not?!! . . . z) It increases the situational awareness flying a low-speed low-altitude machine under poor weather conditions. And so it´s a SAFETY NECESSARY device... ;)

I knew you´d be the first to answer me...:tongue: 3D external view eyecandy, only. Well, yes it´s interesting. If ED is going to model Hokum seat ejection/system-blade separation (A MUST) the physics involved could be translated to what you´re saying...unless you were exclusively talking about the 3D external view (useless) eyecandy :icon_roll . Well, interesting matter but (as last time, my friend) you´re leaving the threat. Yours is a FM question. But IMHO I believe that the same way ED team has (credible)modeled out-of-flight-envelope behaviour in an fixed wing bird will do the same (reasonably) in a rotating wing one. Nobody understand what I´m trying to explain? nobody here has played EECH or Search&Rescue sims?. Nobody use/has used FS2004? :icon_frow.

Hi, I know this question could (and surely will) be taken as a joke...but I do not think so: Will Ka-50´s windscreen wiper be something more than a simple 3D model detail in the external view? I think it not only affects to the eye-candy/game immersion, but also to the added handicap of flying while searching and adquiring targets under poor conditions. Its funcionality (and real ingame usefulness) may involve a slight (or not so) FX engine review...but I believe it worths it. :) Do you remember EEAH, EECH or Search&Rescue...? :icon_wink

Repeat...how old are you, guy?.... :icon_roll

Ok, thanks, I´ll give it a try.

What is "VISB RNG = Loman4"? My fps over large cities drops to 20-25 fps. Water=medium Resolution = 1024 AAx2 AFx4 FX-55(2.7Ghz) + GF6800Ultra (o/c) + 2GB RAM... What I´m doing wrong?

Any benefit with LO1.2? (would be nice)

ok...the same could say when thinking of su-27----->su-33 (navalized/embarked/...corrosion affected ;) ). But I think that are much more design problems to solve in a navalived (plane) su27(su33) than in an hypoteticaly (helicopter, remember) ka-50 navalized:no canards (OMG, no control laws review!), no wing and tailplane folding mechanism design, no arrestor gear modification....and yes "some" structure corrosion-resistance/maintenance review. Think that if there are KAMOV choppers aboard Kuznetsov is just because it is possible...and no other russian helos designer better than Kamov to navalize one of their products. What the f****** thing is the EMBARKED AH-1W/Z Super-cobra?, a rescue or an antisubmarine helo?, nobody around here is aware of "navalized" "attack" "helos" concept is a fact? And, if Kuznetsov was designed with the idea of to protect submarines ,now I´m sure russian army is far more worried about terrorism problems than an hipotetycal naval warfare with american fleet. Roles can always be changed or diverted, has, is, and will happen. Please, think in "what if" missions we all play in Lockon...There´s a campaign (modified to be played with Su-25T) in which amphibious russian forces disembark in Crimea. Without any land-base near...don´t you think would be usefull having a CAS helo force in front of the coast? (US Marines also must be as smoked group of guys as me) All in all, I don´t want to fight anybody about the idea of an embarked KA-50. I think it´s more than a feasible event and in no way dishevelled, in spite of Kuznetsov was intended for other purposes :icon_roll ...But if it has not be done i think is for any other (good) different reason (not said in this thread yet). I accept LO1.2 does not contemplate that possibility because many other have been rejected before in order to preserve realism and I A*L*S*O love that philosophy, but nothing more. Sorry, man, It would kill you ;)

"The obvious reason" you mention is not a solid argument...F-14 also were not designed for bombing tasks, F-15 were not designed for Air-to-ground MAIN task (E version)...and Kuznetsov also (for the reason you mention) was not intended to carry SU-25s...but they have tried to fit them. So times change fast and war scenery has changed since then, and perhaps now Russia Army´s priorities are other... Ok, man, I wanted to mean Ka-32C ;)

Sorry man, the choppers you mention are no more than prototypes (or losers...mi-28 ;) ). The only one "officially" in service is the Ka-50 (even don´t know about ka-52...). So, again, your arguments are...inexistent I think your sarcasm is rather poor...Airwolf is no more than a modified black-painted Bell-222 so it DOES EXIST. Instead of that, you should have gone beyond saying: "you can even land the MI-38 (BTW a really heavier bird) on the Kuz" :icon_roll BTW, please, could you tell us what did you mean (or trying to mean) with this: "Please think about water and the wind, specifically about the sea, just give it a minute, it will come to you." (second reply first page). Not trying to offend you but...how old are you guy? All in all I think (most) people (hope ED read) have taken the meaning of this thread, in what I think could be more than a feasible possibility. ...OUT...

Guys, take it easy. I think is foolish keep discussing if havok could be embarked or not...of course IT IS (until a Kamov´s engineer say the opposite). The question is this: "If Kuznetsov ALREADY carry ATTACK (kamov-32 contrarrotatory-coaxial-rotor and blablabla....) HELOS and if these are (by far) less offensive/war capable than the much modern, better armed, agile (and pretty :) ) Kamov-50 what in the world would be the f****** reason to not replace the older(worse) 32s with the newer(better)50s ones?. Is any kind of a secret disarmament plan?". Tell me who wouldn´t like to play a mission where an amphibious disembark is supported by Kuznetsov embarked Ka-50´s and these (at the same time) protected by Su-33s. OMG, an all in one solution! :icon_roll

Ok, man, repeat with me: "I do not want ED to even think of the (more than feasible) possibility of an Havok embarked...jolines!" :tongue:

Saline/humid ambient is ONE important factor in the aeronautical structures corrosion factor but not the only, also stress loads (really important and dangerous), matherials quality, matherials compatibility, etc...are. If you point to the corrosion factor (ambient induced) of course is an important one in ALL embarked aircrafts/helos...but also in the maintenance of combat aircrafts or even transport civil aircrafts deployed in coastal bases or airports. But at the same time, seems Kamov´s design bureau have already successfully solved this problem related to its "coaxial-contrarrotatory-rotors" technology. You can see it with the KUZNETSOV EMBARKED Ka27-...-32 series :icon_excl

How the US navy/marines fit their choppers in their carriers? ;) ....and how Kuznetsov fit its Ka27/.../32 in it :icon_excl ...perhaps folding rotor blades the same way used when transported? :icon_roll Ok, ok, ka-50 hokum is the only machine affected by corrosion... :tongue: ALL the other world flying machines don´t do even when not embarked....:icon_jook Is the Ka-32´s avionics far superior than the more modern/advanced Ka-50´s one? :icon_wink jejejeje, tell it to US Marines (and Super-Cobra pilots) :tongue: You too...

From rec.aviation.military FAQ by Ross Smith: "The Kuznetsov also carries a number of Kamov Ka-27/28/29/32 helicopters, in various subtypes." AFAIK Ka-32 IS an attack helicopter: http://www.enemyforces.com/helicopters/ka32.htm Is not the AH-1W an embarked ATTACK helo? And also, I do not think that Ka-50´s retractil landing gear to be a problem. SH-3H Seaking and CH-53E SuperStallion are also embarked retractil landing gear helos. So I don´t know exactly why the ka-50 couldn´t take-off/land from an aircarrier. Only Ka-50´s landing gear designers could affirm that.

Will the Ka-50 be allowed to operate from Kuznetsov carrier in LO1.2? (May it not in the real life, don´t know exactly) If so I think it will highly enrich the campaign/mission enviroment.

No, i didn´t...is that the problem? :icon_redf