Cobra360

Hardly realistic is it? The Maverick can only track targets moving at 60-80mph. It can be also be used against slow moving helos but hitting a Su-25 with one. Thats good, my sidewinders have trouble and they a dedicated dogfight missiles. lol At least flares are useless against the Maverick's guidance systems.

The laser can overheat with extended use. You need to turn it off when your not using it and let it cool down before you can use it again.

Thats a great idea GG, no game has ever done buddy lasing before. It would be real sweet picking the aimpoint for your wingmans wepons as each makes a pass on a target. Or to make multiple simultaneous strikes at key parts of a building or bridge to bring it down. BTW I'd like to know GG if you know how the lasers are programmed to fire different sequence laser codes or even the basic theory behind it? I always want to know how that worked IRL.

It may be possible to do Bl50N/52Ns these F-16s were the first to get JDAM capability. The JDAM can opperate in three modes kind of like the AGM-88. There's a PB mode or pre briefed where the target co-ordinates are already programed into the bomb on takeoff. Then the pilot would just fly to a release point and pickle the weapon, in a similar manner to CCRP boming except the target is already defined and the player cannot change. Similar to how the Kh-41 opperates in Lockon. The JDAM can also be used in CCIP mode or TOO, target of oppertunity. The whole launch procedure is exactly like a normal CCIP bomb release. Except the JDAM is not effected by wind unlike normal dumb bombs. A third mode that is not used by the F-16s with the APG-68V5/7 radars because they do not have a SAR mode but is by the 68V9s is where the pilot selects a target on the air to ground radar screen. Then selects the JDAM, the target co-ordinates are transfered into the weapon on the fly and it is released in a mode similar to a CCRP drop. Another way to release a JDAM is by using the Sniper XR pod to ID the target and the pod generates target co-ordinates for transfere to the eapon prior to release, but the Sniper pod is not going to be used in your work so no point in going on.

The real Su-27 has no air to ground modes built into it's radar. Only a basic CCIP delivery system, same goes for the Su-33. IRL the Su-33 would use data link information for a rough estimate of the ships position and release the Kh-41 when it is estimated to be in range. The guidance system in the Kh-41 then takes over and it uses an on board radar to find the ship. In another sonario the enemy ship may be ''painted'' by another source such as a ship or bomber. The target co-ordinates are then datalinked to the Su-33 and can be fed directly into the Kh-41 prior to release Well that's how it would have worked if the money held out, see below.

Which version of the F-16 are you guys working on or which would you like to do. I see you already said you have some F-16CJ manuals. So I guess your going down the Block 50/52 route as Falcon. Are you going to model the latest CCIP Block 50/52s which have the APG-68V9 radar and the Sniper XR targeting pod, plus the JHMCS AIM-9X combo. I know all this stuff is of the latest technology and you may not get all the de-classified info for the job. Or just do a basic Block 50/52 with just HARM capability along with the usuall Maverick and dumb bombs, no fancy JDAMs or WCMDs.

Thats a good insight and slightly light hearted view towards Gs. I thought USN Hornets were limited to 7.5G and only the Hornets exported to Switzerland were the only Hornets cleared to 9G by the FCS. I did not realise the Combat Edge vest was so effective that it will let experienced pilots pull 8G without straining, but it did not state for how long. If thats the case then game models G very heavily. Or it's data is from de-classified 1980 results when Combat Edge was not around. I'm not to well up on the sort of G-equipment Russian pilots use but I'd imagine it's in a similar class seeing as their top end fighters can reach 11 or 12G even for only a few seconds. Thats got to be a hell of a strain for the pilots.

There are some F-16 sounds on the Fighterops site that you may be able to..''borrow'' http://www.fighterops.com/sounds.htm BTW, are ED seriously considering working on a flyable F-16 in a future project? If so thats news to me and happy days all round. The http://www.f-16.net site has a wealth of info on the various F-16 Blocks. Their forums aslo have some RL F-16 pilots and maintainers, crew chiefs that drop by from time to time.

What settings are you running FC at. I have a very similar spec to yours and I don't have that proplem as sevre as you describe. Maybe lower the res a little if you are using anything above 1024x768. I can run 1.02 with the effects set to high in-game no problem and I have a 3200. If that won't help maybe drop the AA and AF down a notch. The 6800GT is more than able for that kind of action and lighting effects. It could be a Forceware driver issue.

I'm well aware of the topic and I have already commented on it in the link in the first post of this thread. But seeing as the thread is called flight envelope issues when using full G effects I saw an oppertunity to include it here instead of creating another thread for my point which I think is fairly valid.

A small image that my be of some help, I,m not too sure http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://www.makettinfo.hu/anyagok/referencia/mi-26/mi-26_1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.makettinfo.hu/anyagok/referencia/mi-26/mi-26.htm&h=887&w=1214&sz=165&tbnid=Tl5QtV_y5KAJ:&tbnh=109&tbnw=150&hl=en&start=22&prev=/images%3Fq%3DMi-26%26start%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DN http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://www.mischa2000.de/Technik/Hubschrauber/Mil_Mi26-14.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mischa2000.de/Technik/Hubschrauber/body_hubschrauber.html&h=365&w=515&sz=23&tbnid=IJbgcLm6ynIJ:&tbnh=90&tbnw=128&hl=en&start=98&prev=/images%3Fq%3DMi-26%26start%3D80%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DN http://www.rostvertol.be/images/mi-26t_schema.jpg Trying to find some close ups but they are hard to find in a decent res.

I heard of something like that that is supposed to be use on later Typhoon models. I think it was some sort of advanced chaff made from a slightly different material. When released the internal jammer in the Typhoon will send a burst of noise jamming at a particular frequency that will bounce of the chaff cloud and generate a larger false target far from the aircraft's and the chaff cloud's position. I believe it was called jaff. I read that back in 1999, it could have been complete hear say but thats what i gathered from it. Never heard if IR chaff before.

And a few here also http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?front=yes&maxres=500&keywords=Mi-26

Thanks Brit, see you've come across my double alias from the Ubi fourms. Hopefully ED might include a features like in mbot's missions in 1.2.

Thanks for clearing that up D.

Thats a low blow, LOL. Give AF a break guys. Anyway to do a realistic terrain you will need some sattelite data to base your work on.

I'd like to know what radar version the F-15C in LOMAC has. The manual states both the APG-63 in one part and the APG-70 in the other. From memory of what i know about the F-15, The origional F-15A/Bs started with the APG-63V0. Then when the F-15C/Ds appeared in 1980 they had improved APG-63PSP radars. The F-15E came along in 1988 with the APG-70 and from 1989 the APG-70 was fitted as standard to newly built F-15C/Ds but the A2G features were locked out on the USAF models. At this time in 1989 some F-15A/Bs and C/Ds went through a MSIP program which improved the avonics. These were the first F-15s to be able to launch the AIM-120. Then from arond 1994/5 the APG-70 in the F-15C/Ds were replaced with the APG-63V1. The main advantage of this radar is it has a grearter mean time between failures. So today the entire F-15E fleet has the -70 radar and the majority of the F-15C/Ds have the -63V1. Some ANG units with the MSIP F-15A/Bs still have the -70 also. From 2006 the F-15Es will start being upgraded with the APG-63V3 AESA. It is then planned around 2008/10 that the surviving F-15C/Ds still flying will get the APG-63V3 with the A2G functions locked out as it is cheaper than the -63V2 radar. Just wondering what radar version is LOMAC modeling. I think its the APG-63V1, what are your thoughts?

If I may take this topic in a slightly different direction but still in respect to G-force. That is the issue of G-force on the airframe nevermind the pilot. Let me explain. IRL if the MiG-29 is fitted with external fuel tanks it is limited to 4G flight due to stress on the wings, pylons and the tanks themselves. If you exceeded 4G you could cause serious structeral of fatigue damage to your plane. If the external tanks are then empty but still on the wings the allowable G-limit goes back up I think but not sure how far. The F-16 for example I know for fact that when its fitted with underwing tanks its limited to 7G until they are empty or punched off and the pilot is then free to go to 9G if he/she wishes. I'd imagine a very similar limit is in place for the F-15 and it's external tanks. AAMs as far as I know have little to no effect on the G-limit of the aircraft except if the pylons are not rated for high G wing loading. In US aircraft and a lot of NATO planes, the fitting of air to ground weapons limits the fighter to 6-6.5G depending if the fighter has the power to make a high G turn while carrying a heavy weapon load. The Russian MiG-29 and Su-27 family are designed to be over G'ed to a certain extent like you can do in FC. But the F-15 is not ment to go above 9G and I have heard of RL cases where pilots have exceeded the G-limit on the F-15 and they require a lot of work after such a work out. In the A-10 and Su-25 I find they are modeled well as thier RL limits are 7.5G and 6.5G for a clean config and when the weapons are loaded you a lucky to exceed 4-5G in both aircraft. I only have 1.02 but I find the G-limits on the MiG-29C and Su-33 overly generous when carrying A2G weapons. In Falcon 4 when you exceed 6G with A2G weapons you can hear the wings and pylons groaning under the strain and when it come to releasing your bombs afterwards you are lucky if they are willing to leave the jet. It a feature I quite like and seeing as FC is modeling damage as realistically as possible it may as well be put it. Just one more thing to think about when releasing bombs, thats all we need. :D LOL

In the Editor for Lomac is it possible to place parked fighters in airfields with their cockpits open and ladders placed beside them. I'm just wondering because I was going through the 1.1 manual and I saw a screen shot of some MiG-29s that were parked with their cockpits open and red ladders beside them and also a red cover pannel over the gun port LERX. I can place aircraft on the ground no problem, but is it possible to adjust these little things. I know the F-15 and A-10 have ladders that auto deploy when the cockpit is open. Thank in advance.

Very nice work. But I'd love to know why ED have a weapon as advanced as the AGM-154 in LOMAC yet excluding something like NVGs. If the AGM-154 is there they may as well put in a few JDAMs, have Litening II targeting pods for the A-10 and the AIM-9X for the NATO forces. IF memory serves me the AGM-154 went operational in 1998/9 and was fired in anger in Operation Desert Fox. Good work though, nice to see people with skill that care about the sim.

The best 2D cockpits ever made where you can actually use 99.9% of the buttons and they all do something. Then when your in a dogfight you can use the 3D cockpit view as you won't be flying heads down pressing buttons. What has happened is that more people now are graphics whores. Whatever happen to gameplay. Gameplay comes first in my book. Yes, LOMAC can wow us with it's looks and it does have a few nice touches with the Su-25T flight model. But F4 is doing things LOMAC can't, the dynamic campaing system for one. Non scripted suck down landings and the feeling that you are taking part in a full scale war and not just flying missions that are stuck together in an order. If F4 had LOMACs graphics, no system in the world would be able to run it. Look at the job people have trying to get a heavy mission in FC to run smoothly, and thats only with a fraction of the number of units in a F4 campaign. Personally, I love the idea of getting in a jet and starting it up cold. Going through a check list, flicking on a 100 or so switches to bring your jet alive. I'd love to see this in LOMAC, I really would. I'd pay 50-60 Euro for that feature alone and nothing else. I'm not bashing LOMAC here. It's great also. It's like having two women and you can only pick one. Yet from time to time you stray from one to the other because they both give you a little someting you want, and you keep coming back for more. I long for the day when a sim comes along that can combine the best features of F4 and FC. It would be like the second coming. Even if the damn thing cost me 100 Euro I'd buy it and have no regrets in doing so. Thats how much I love my sims. We can all get very attached to our sim of choice. Stand up, get angry and fight for it, defend it, and tuck it up into bed at night. These are truely ground breaking and rare games/sims that we should marvel over. The amount of time it takes to roll out these creations, they are not like an FPS that are two to a dozen. I'm glad I've had the oppertunity to experience these sims knowing I'll never get inside a real fighter and fly one and imagine what it's all about.

The new AIM-9X uses IR to track the aircraft as a heat source as well as recognise it as an aircraft and not just a heat source. Plus the imaging infra red seeker also tracks a spot within the heat source so it is less likely to be fooled be flares which will leave the target at high speed in relation to the natural motion of the aircraft. Gone are the days of AIM-9H missiles tracking the sun if a fighter flies across it with the missile coming up directly behind it. Add speaking of the Python. The new Python 5 has a theoritical 360 degree sphere in LOAL mode. Those are some high claims to live up to. And according to Rafael the Python can re-aquire its target if it misses on it's first pass, provided it has enough energy to do so. If all this is true and the Python 5 is as leathal as it's older brother the 4, any half decent fighter pilot armed with a Python 5 will be almost invinceable in a dogfight. The new generation of dogfight missiles must be a scary thought for any fighter pilot today, those that are going to on the recieving end that is. Flares will soon become almost useless. What will be need in future will be small, accurate and fast lasers located on the aircraft's skin that can be targeted at an incoming missile and burn out it's IR seeker head, rendering the missile useless. But for that to happen you need some very good missile detection system and a lot of computing power to aim and fire at the missile in time. Systems like these are already in testing on RAF C-130s and are not likely to be fitted to fighters any time soon until the systems can be made smaller.

Thats good. I thought I was having a problem with my keyboard. But IRL the Su-27 has up, intermediate, and down flap settings. Very much like the F-15 and yes the Su-33. It's just I get times in the Su-27 when I need some extra lift without killing the speed with full on flaps.

Cheers Subs, strange that does not work for me with the Su-27 or MiG-29 only on the F-15 and A-10. I've always had this issue with Lockon since day one. Maybe it's a 1.02 thing, I havent got around to getting FC yet but I will. Thanks for your help with my F4 installation BTW.

No pilot can handle 9G for two minutes. This is a sim here. The only way a pilot can take 9G for 2 minutes or more is if they are using the Eurofighter G-suit or the new one being made for the F/A-22 in which case they can stay a 9G all day if they want to. In the USAF when new pilots are qualifing for a place on the F-15 and F-16 they have to be able to handle 9G for 15 seconds with the G-suit in the 1980s. With the new Combat Edge vest brought out in 1990 it is a bit easier to do but pilots still have to work very hard to maintain it. In FC you should be able to sustain 6G for about 2-3 minutes with no black out G-LOC effects. So A-10 and Su-25 pilots need not worry about G-force anymore.IMO