Frostiken

In a game called Falcon 4.0.

A fog will stand out much greater in visible light than in infrared, but that's about it.

-15s tend to gas a lot of smoke out the ass when putting a lot of power on quickly from low speed. It's pretty much the same theory behind why cars spew a lot of exhaust doing the same thing. Given that the F-15 isn't maintaining high-alpha and is following an A-10 with its airbrakes deployed nearly to full, I'm going to say that's exactly what's happening. But no, F-15s aren't like B-52s and leave big greasy black stains across the sky.

I was hoping for that for one of the Legends. Wouldn't count on it for the actual fighter.

Yeah I will admit, saying that the airframe could still change was a little odd.

Why not, all that happened was some stuff got broke. I guess I should add it to my sig.

Because ED knows that the people asking for the F/A-18 are idiots :D :D :D Fly real life exciting missions like into Virgina neighborhoods. And into San Diego neighborhoods. And in to South Carolina neighborhoods!

lol You do realize that if you wanted the 'realistic' perspective of the cockpit, assuming you're sitting a normal distance from your monitor, you should zoom in so that the HUD takes up the majority of your screen... ...right? Do you seriously think the HUD and MFDs are so god damn far forward that you can see all three just fine without moving your head?

Can you find out for me? This is something that over the many moons I've been on this forum has never conclusively been said to exist, usually someone saying they're "pretty sure" is the best we can get :( Seen plenty of these threads and people are telling other players to ignore the warning, does nothing, etc.

I also don't see any serious need to put tanks in the jet game and vice versa. All that means is limiting mission design for one or the other, and diluting your playerbase on a per-game basis, split between the people who want to chug around at 50km/h in a giant steel coffin that will probably be destroyed by a single TOW, Konkurs, AGM-65, Vikhr or Javelin, and the people who want the freedom and relative safety of flight with the awesomeness of a giant goddamn cannon and all the crazy-cool stuff it does. Combining them into one wouldn't make either party happy, as you'd end up with big expansive missions that the flyboys enjoy, or smaller missions designed to make the experience somewhat tolerable for those on the ground. The fact that tanks and aircraft are modeled so poorly in ArmA is really what makes that particular game tolerable from an infantry perspective. Keeping them apart just lets each type of game focus on their strengths.

What? Anyway, I think the biggest problem of a ground unit would be having to really up the fidelity of the ground detail. Giant flat polygon terrain with no detail works when you're usually a few miles in the air, not so much when you'll be looking at it all the time. I would imagine that any armor simulator would be its own product and not part of the air simulators, which isn't really a big deal.

I was under the impression that the resource management thing was basically a global feature, like the mission editor. Additionally, given enough demands for it and ED certainly is no dummy, I'm certain they're working on treating aircraft as modules to a global engine instead of separate installs, which will make it much easier to integrate it all together (and end up with a much better game as well).

Okay? They're still wrong - the nozzles are screwed shut when under mil power as well, which they would've been under shortly after takeoff. To state that it was clearly a 'compressor stall' is utterly moronic, and then to go on to attribute that to the 2008 crash which has already been closed and most decided was not a compressor stall just ruins any shred of credibility you still have. Eyewitnesses may lack a certain level of credibility but you will not mistake an engine in afterburner for a jet making 'no sound'. I guess they could've put it into AB right when they crashed?

I would imagine through sheer chance you'd end up with about as much knowledge as the schmucks on this forum :P

Soo..... patch? ... really looking forward to functional ILS :) And wheel-eating runway fixes. And other good stuff. EDIT: This is where my post got moved to? Kind of a weird place to have this thread... "reality"?

From that site: I find it hard to believe any site apparently full of aviation enthusiasts has any credibility whatsoever when they can't understand the basic fact that when an engine is shut down the nozzle opens all the way, and it only closes when it's under power (opens for afterburner too). Additionally, they attribute the F/A-18 crash in San Diego to a compressor stall, when it wasn't, it failed because of a series of major maintenance ****-ups.

Our jets travel over 150 mi just to get to the practice range in Wales. So, what are you saying, that Seymour jets - the home of the F-15E training program - cannot fly anywhere outside of North Carolina to get to the training range?

That's actually pretty low as far as dropping bombs is concerned.

I find it hard to believe there isn't a computer of some sort involved down the line that isn't constantly monitoring the engine. Anyway, I was implying a major abnormality could slam the engine into secondary power mode which will move the nozzle as well.

<_< >_> - SLI SUPPORT

The properties of the engine flexshafts isn't going to cause the nozzle to change position when it hits the ground. Also, as mentioned, throttle doesn't have the effect on the nozzles you may think it does, especially since in the crash the throttles are more likely to shift than anything else. Throttles don't take much to move and it's just a lever connected to a cable. Other things they can use: all engines have downloadable memory units on the engine controller which will tell you a surprising amount of things to include aircraft flight parameters and every little thing wrong with the engine with frightening degrees of accuracy. Plus, has anyone forgotten the most useful tool, the flight data recorder? It's a D-model so it might not have had one, but still.

Well they had plenty of time to dump fuel everywhere, so obviously whatever emergency they had took place over a long period of time. Well apparently it was a retirement community so they were probably still driving back from the Early Bird Special at the Country Kitchen Buffet.

Still strapped into his seat? So much for egress I guess. I have no idea what the F/A-18s innards look like or how the hydro is routed, but a shell-out so catastrophic that it did that sort of damage seems very remote. Shell-outs are rare, shell-outs that break through the engine housing even rarer. Witnesses did say 'flames from one engine' which usually means a blowout or FOD damage. I doubt that was afterburner - it's very hard to see the flame in daylight, and it would have made so much noise nobody, no matter how ignorant of aircraft, would be able to mistake it for anything else. Also, an engine shutdown opens the nozzle, but so does afterburner. Based on my experience with the engines the right was shut down and the left was in mil or sec power (which is when the nozzle is closed the tightest).

So, what happens if there's a linkage failure on the new flappy-lid door, and it falls against the engine inlet? Does the jet implode?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17640618 While eyewitness reports are from people who probably don't know what they're talking about, they say it was dumping fuel and under very low power. This is the second time an F/A-18 has crashed into a neighborhood, albeit with apparently a lot fewer casualties. While I can't speculate on the nature of the emergency (assuming the Navy maintenance derps learned engine fuel flow problems probably shouldn't be deferred) what it sounds like is that the pilots knew they were going to have to ditch the plane, and dumped as much fuel as possible in order to limit the fire when the plane crashed (which is really always the biggest danger), and to reduce the weight such that the plane wouldn't smash through fifteen houses before it stopped. Additionally in the interest of speed control it also sounds like it was full flaps down and riding the edge of a stall to bleed as much speed as possible. Sounds like it worked, because from what I can tell it smashed right through the one building and fell to a stop in the backyard, with no serious fire. If that's true, good job pilots! Regarding the nozpoz, I find it incredibly hard to believe a bird strike would bring down a two-engine plane. I know the F/A-18 has ****-all for power, but still, it's a stretch, unless the engine completely shelled out and destroyed the AMADs or something.